Talk:Arequipa Peru Temple

Original dedicatory plans
Hello again, everyone! In this article, it was originally noted that President Nelson would dedicate this temple. With Elder Soares having done so last weekend, I was later led to this article, which indicated the reason for the change in this arrangement was that President Nelson, although otherwise healthy, was experiencing a minor stomach issue that prevented his attendance. I recognize that would have been inappropriate to mention in the template for this temple, wherein the only relevant information is who actually dedicated the temple, but how much related to this particular element, if any, should be mentioned in this article? Just wanted to put that out there. And I think that I would not have a problem with any decision made on this. But I did not want to unilaterally add the information without first mentioning it here. Thanks. --Jgstokes (talk) 01:03, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't think it warrants inclusion in the article. ChristensenMJ (talk) 02:44, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Fair enough, ChristensenMJ. Upon further thought, I probably would have opted for a parenthetical mention or something in the footnotes, but I know you well enough by now to trust your judgment call here. The one possible thing I can think of that might necessitate a change on this matter is whether or not President Nelson may have authored the dedicatory prayer, and then subsequently had Elder Soares give it. But I assume that would be noted whenever the prayer is published. In the meantime, thanks for your thoughts on the matter. --Jgstokes (talk) 02:51, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello again, everyone! With the dedicatory prayer having been published, it notes that, although given by Elder Soares, it was written by President Nelson. Does that change what information should be included here? Again, I'm fine either way, but thought I would ask anyways. --Jgstokes (talk) 03:24, 20 December 2019 (UTC)