Talk:Provo Utah Temple

Untitled
Expanded article somewhat about what makes the Provo Temple unique. Added links about the basics of Mormon temple worship. Amaranth22

Moroni?
Just looked at the official website. High-res picture there shows no statue on the spire; makes me wonder if this was a prank addition. Could someone post a photo on this page before I decide to delete the (currently) unsupported statement about Moroni statue? Unschool 20:09, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, now I see that the second link does show the statue, but the first does not. What gives?  Which is the "official" site? Unschool

Original Temple Picture
It would be nice to include a picture before and after the renovations that added the Moroni to the temple (and include discussion of the change). Daw44 (talk) 16:24, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Escalators
I had remembered there being escalators in the Provo Temple when I was at the MTC in late 1999. After a session in August 2008, I asked a temple worker, and she confirmed that they had been removed a few years earlier and replaced with stairs. Escalators with layouts similar to those found previously in the Provo Temple can be seen in both the Seattle and Mexico City temples. Bobomejor (talk) 09:54, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Images
I erased the gallery, all the photos are in commons. They were at the time the only pictures available in commons so no need to place them in the article as well. I placed the only picture not uploaded in commons into the template, besides it doesn't have people in it. Bobjgalindo (talk) 15:49, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Significant Changes
Hi, I have made some significant changes to the structure of the article in an attempt to improve its quality. In addition, I have added a paragraph about the function of the temple and rewritten the lead paragraph. There are still some significant additions that can be made if anyone has access to the book Provo's Two Temples by Richard Cowan. --Jmjosh90    04:59, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Pillar of Fire Myth
I changed the line about the Pillar of Fire symbolism and added a reference to show that it is a local myth. I provided a source https://photogent.com/provo-utah-temple/wiki/ which points out that it is a myth. There are sources that are for and against the idea. This was reverted supposedly because the original source supposedly said that it was a symbolic but that source doesn't say that either. It just says it has "long been viewed" as such. Jgstokes, is that good enough to show that it is a local myth and not a fact? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:680:CD82:BD0:E84D:6616:C845:F7E1 (talk) 01:30, 20 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Photogent is not a reliable source for Wikipedia purposes as it is self-published. If you find something else from a reliable source that says this, and it meets the criteria for inclusion here, that would be acceptable. User:Jgstokes (talk)—We can disagree without becoming disagreeable. 01:45, 20 December 2023 (UTC)


 * What about the fact that the source that is linked doesn't say that the temple was inspired by the scripture but instead it has "long been viewed". Would you be ok with changing the sentence to "It has long been viewed that the design of the temple ..."?  That matches closer to what the source actually says.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:680:CD82:BD0:E84D:6616:C845:F7E1 (talk) 02:26, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * That's kind of clunky as written. Perhaps "The temple's design has long been viewed" would work and flow better. User:Jgstokes (talk)—We can disagree without becoming disagreeable. 03:29, 20 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Interestingly enough, Emil Fetzer's page says almost the same thing but has no citation. Someone tagged it "citation needed" but no one has added one.  I searched online for any source of either side and there isn't one.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:680:CD82:BD0:E84D:6616:C845:F7E1 (talk) 03:07, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Then I'd recommend what I suggested in the comment above for the adjusted wording. I will boldly change it to that for now, unless there are further objections or concerns. Thanks for being willing to discuss this. User:Jgstokes (talk)—We can disagree without becoming disagreeable. 03:31, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Renaming to Provo Utah Rock Canyon Temple
Hi Jgstokes, I reverted your article move because it was premature. The press release refers to the renaming as happening upon the temple's reopening (future tense) and the Church's official page for the temple still refers to it as the "| Provo Utah Temple". All that being said, I appreciate your efforts to edit this article. Thank you! Jodapop (talk) 00:09, 1 March 2024 (UTC)


 * With respect, there was nothing premature about the move, nor should it be controversial. The Church of Jesus Christ Temples site has been used for sourcing of many other temple updates, and that site has officially moved the Provo Utah Temple to the Provo Utah Rock Canyon Temple. This report, also from an often-cited source on Wikipedia temple pages, states that the "temple will be renamed as it prepares to close for reconstruction. Not when it reopens, but "as it prepares to close for reconstruction". That is supported here, here, and here, It's my understanding that when the current temple is demolished, the new one will be built a short distance away from where the original stood. I can find other sources on this, and I won't redo the move until there is consensus to do so, but I did my research before bolddly moving the page. I woulddn't have done that unless I had the sources to back it up. Hope that clarifies my reason for the move. Please feel free to let me know if more sources are needed to support/justify my actions. User:Jgstokes (talk)—We can disagree without becoming disagreeable. 01:03, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I see that you replied promptly to my first comment. I only saw it just now, so thank you for your patience. I respect your diligence and commitment to Wikipedia's guidelines, especially editing boldly and seeking consensus. I think we just happen to disagree on the interpretation of the sources.
 * I don't have time at the moment, but I'm leaving this note so you know I'm not ignoring your comments. I will give a proper reply sometime in the next 48 hours, hopefully later tonight.
 * All the best. Jodapop (talk) 21:12, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi Jgstokes, thank you for clarifying your reasoning for moving the article when you did. I called the move premature because I can imagine future news reports referring to the currently-standing structure as the "Provo Utah Temple" when that structure is completely demolished. For example, "Demolition work on the Provo Utah Temple was completed this week ahead of its reconstruction. The new temple will be rededicated as the "Provo Utah Rock Canyon Temple". Using the old and new names to refer to the old and new buildings respectively makes sense, so having an article with the "Rock Canyon" name appear with a photo of the old building doesn't make sense to me.

As I see it, there isn't consensus about the timing of the temple's renaming. This is how I interpret each of the sources I found, including the sources you shared:

This is how I see each title with regards to the five WP:CRITERIA characteristics: Because of the ambiguity, we should keep the page at Provo Utah Temple for now. "Provo Utah Temple" is most natural. Anecdotally, most people in Provo who I ask hadn't heard about the name change, but those who had heard remembered the new name easily.

All of that being said, we should consider the option of two separate articles, perhaps one at Provo Temple (1972–2024) and another at Provo Utah Rock Canyon Temple, with Provo Utah Temple redirecting to the Rock Canyon article. This would not be consistent with Ogden Utah Temple, but that building was heavily renovated, whereas the Provo Temple will be entirely demolished and rebuilt, as I understand it. It would be consistent with Nauvoo Temple and Nauvoo Illinois Temple, but those two buildings were separated by 154 years. With the name change and such different architecture, I don't see why they shouldn't be separate articles, but now that discussion is open on the topic here, such a move shouldn't be done without consensus first.

With two separate articles, I would support moving the articles immediately. Otherwise, we should wait until further reporting that uses the "Rock Canyon" name. Jodapop (talk) 23:48, 5 March 2024 (UTC)


 * With all due respect, "I can imagine future news reports referring to the currently-standing structure as the 'Provo Utah Temple' when that structure is completely demolished." is a personal conjectured opinion, which does not meet Wikipedia standards for inclusion. The Church Temples site has shifted the temple to the new name, and we use that source for some verifications on Wikipedia. That being said, I can see your point about the sources being somewhat ambiguous on this for now. And the Church's official list still shows it as the Provo Utah Temple. So we can keep it there for now. I might be in favor of creating separate pages for the Provo Utah and Provo Utah Rock Canyon Temples, but since they are the same edifice, and since the renamed temple will still have the same number as the temple it will be replacing, that makes separate articles a bit more difficult to maintain. If there's a way around that, separate articles might work. Thanks for sharing your thoughts and analysis. I appreciate your good-faith efforts as well. User:Jgstokes (talk)—We can disagree without becoming disagreeable. 22:21, 9 March 2024 (UTC)