Talk:Membership history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Context
The question is what would be proper context. I *think* I've read articles comparing number of self-reported members in national surveys vs. The church membership numbers. However, the question is for *this* article, what would represent context. Also anything with levels of activity...Naraht (talk) 19:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

I think organizations are the ones that determine who is and who isn't a member in the organization. Do you know of an organization where membership is determined by someone else?

As for the counties the church doesn't release it on their webpage. ARDA publishes the data for each county (done for each census year and not every year). However, at least ARDA's data is highly flawed. For one, if you look at counties with the same number of congregations within each state you'll see membership numbers repeat over and over again. - unless a large portion had exactly 354 members and another portion of the counties in the state has exactly 221 members... 2010 count didn't have this flaw, but 2020 does. The other ARDA issue regardless of census year data is that counties membership is counted by members attending congregations in that county, rather than county they reside in. Counties with no congregations have zero members.Dmm1169 (talk) 01:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)


 * The first section of the page defines membership in the LDS Church. This hopefully should clarify what is a member and what numbers are being used. - Thanks.Dmm1169 (talk) 02:08, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
 * You have it completely backwards. The individual determines if they are a member of the organization, not the other way around. Should an organization be able to count a person as a member if that individual does not consider themselves a member? There needs to be a reliable, secondary source for membership data otherwise it must be caveated. Also, the reference for how membership is determined is a tech wiki! The truth is, the Church doesn't say how they determine membership. We have an idea, but we don't really know. Epachamo (talk) 18:36, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Added ref from the Church Handbook of Instruction on the lds.org website. And would like opinions on whether the history of being able to self-remove from the LDS church membership would make sense here, or if it belongs elsewhere. (While definitely a source with a strong POV, https://mormon-alliance.org/casereports/volume3/part1/v3p1c05.htm for the story of Norman Hancock.)Naraht (talk) 19:11, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
 * There are several third party sources out there, however they source back to the first party source which is why it's used, or having their own without dating back giving just a snapshot of that year using their methodology. Membership figures released by the church is the only consistent figures that I've seen of that shows increases and declines in growth. Let me know if you know of any others. I don't know of any recent survey data that was also conducted say even 20 years ago.
 * However, using the church's data not perfect either. For example, the criteria to becoming a member is more stringent today than say 25 years ago. This effects how many are joining and therefore perceived growth by this metric. However, membership growth is still reliable enough to show trends.
 * This article doesn't report activity rates or self-reported adherence (I've yet to see a multi-national or worldwide on a survey on this topic). Although this is the only one that dates back to the creation of the church and generally what other sources uses when they talk about growth.
 * Do you think the page should be removed altogether? Is there a better title you'd recommend to show growth or decline of this organization? Would the title "Growth of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" be better? What are your thoughts? - Thanks. Dmm1169 (talk) 12:48, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * If there are no reliable, secondary sources, then it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. That said, I don't think this article should be deleted, because I think we can find secondary sources out there. If they draw their data from the church though, it must be caveated. I don't think the new title "Growth of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" would be better. In California, the Church numbers are declining. There have been several periods of decline in Church history. Would we need to change the title to "Decline of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints"? Epachamo (talk) 15:17, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * As you mentioned name change may not be necessary, and I would prefer a broad discussion on it before renaming. The reason I'm thinking of name change is to broaden the scope to allow survey date (if existent). Although, a worldwide/multiregional survey (if existent) would still probably be relevant under the current name.
 * Growth could broadly represent times/areas of decline. The 1800's had periods of decline in membership. Growth of religion includes religions in decline. Muslim population growth also had periods of decline centuries ago. Christian population growth has areas where it's shrinking. The term growth can be used broadly to represent the overall study for growth/decline.
 * Other ideas included "Historical" such as Historical Jewish population, or "Demographics" such as Demographics of Jehovah's Witnesses (but that's more broad of a title).
 * If name change is warranted, ideas include:
 * Historical Trends of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
 * Growth of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
 * Population Trends of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
 * but I would want broader conversation before changing the name.
 * As for surveys, the Pew Forum has one conducted in 2007 and in 2014 which the latter is reflected in the US Membership Statistics Page rather than this one. (US still consists more than 1/3 of the overall membership, but its membership is growing faster outside the US). Thanks. - Dmm1169 (talk) 04:29, 8 April 2024 (UTC)