Category talk:Latter Day Saint denominations

Mormon denomination tree
The "Template:Mormon_denomination_tree" has been removed by an editor, who has commented that it is an "ugly and misleading graphic". It previously was a the very bottom of the article.

Should this article have the Mormon denomination tree?—What does everyone think? -SESmith 01:27, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


 * On my browser, the tree is ugly and is hard to read as the information overlaps. As it contains only the major schisms in a very small format, it has a high probablity of misleading the reader.  I would suggest a new more comprehensive tree be created as part of a distinct article on the "LDS family" of religious organizations.  Then that article could be linked to all appropriate articles.  WBardwin 01:33, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm intrigued by this "high probability of misleading". What is the concern here? -SESmith 06:47, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Other than the emergence of the Fundamentalist Church(es), this chart only illustrates the major schism(s) at the time of JSmith's death. That is not historically accurate.  The first small schism occurred some years earlier in Kirtland, Ohio.  Then came the breakup of the larger body of the church in the pressure cooker of Missouri and Nauvoo at the prophet's death.  A few other small groups broke off in the months after the death, many of which died out or were later absorbed into the larger schisms.  The Utah Brighamites also had their share of small splinter groups during the early years before the issue of polygamy triggered the emergence of the Fundamentalists.  So this chart (which truly needs cleanup -- about a dozen words overlap on my browzer) presents a simplified picture of a complicated religious history by focusing on one narrow historic period.  I believe that misleads the uninformed reader.  In addition, the chart's horizontal scale -- focusing on decades of "time" -- is really unnecessary for the information contained in the present chart.  So, I suggest that we make a bigger chart -- or make several showing the actual time frame(s) of the various schisms.  These charts could be a real asset in a new article dealing with this important topic in the LDS movement's history.  The origin of the various schisms is also relevant to the present relationships between the churches, which would also be a good topic to present in the proposed article.  Does such an article make sense to anyone?  Comments?  WBardwin 07:13, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I think the tree is a valuable addition and a good introduction for the general reader. Until a new version that is agreed to be clearer and more accurate can be produced, I'd recommend replacing this image. TimVickers 18:42, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't find a chart that presents only major denominations resulting from schisms in a church to be "misleading". Overly-simplified for the savvy reader, perhaps, but hardly "misleading". This chart clearly (depending on your browser) presents when the 4 or 5 largest Latter Day Saint denominations emerged. I do understand the general concerns with the ugliness of the chart, its format, lack of comprehensive details etc., but would agree with WBardwin's suggestion that—like most things in WP—those who have a problem with it should replace it with something better. Like TimVickers, to me this seems like a better option than just rejecting it outright because it doesn't meet a higher level of detail or aesthetics. -SESmith 22:41, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Incidentally, I also find WBardwin's suggestion for an article on the history of the Latter Day Saint schisms to be a great one. -SESmith 22:45, 29 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the interest -- I'm copying this discussion to the talk page associated with Category:Latter Day Saint denominations - which could be a title for the proposed article.  Let's talk/outline the article there.  I think there are a few minor schisms which aren't included in this category list.  Can anyone add to the list?  WBardwin 17:45, 30 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I, too, find the template visually unappealing. At a minimum, the colors should be toned down.  Having less colors would probably help also.  The layout seems flawed as well.  The title line doesn't line up, and the origins of the branches are difficult to determine.  IMHO, a vertical text list with dates, name, and founder would take less space and be easier to understand. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle)  (Talk) 03:03, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

-- Material above moved from discussion on The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. WBardwin 17:45, 30 May 2007 (UTC)