Talk:Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints

There is currently a lawsuit going on over the use of the name "Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints" between the Community of Christ and the South Restoration Branch in Raytown, Missouri.

The dispute is over which group has the legal right to use the RLDS church name. Therefore, I think NPOV dictates that the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints NOT simply redirect to Community of Christ but instead explain the contraversy that is going on over the name. --BenMcLean 15:20, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * What it ought to do is explain the church and its history. This article has major issues according to numerous Wikipedia polices. See WP:UNDUE, WP:NPOV. There is more to the RLDS than this lawsuit, see Joseph Smith III. I am tagging the article for NPOV. IvoShandor 16:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * IvoShandor is correct. This article, as written currently, has nothing to do with the title. It should be merged into Community of Christ article or the Restoration Branches article. You guys take your pick. It is not significant enough to stand on it's own. Ben, what is your opinion about a merge; you pick the most appropriate article? --Storm Rider (talk) 16:21, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I was just about to say that, this material could easily be covered in Community of Christ. IvoShandor 16:33, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone have access to how the case is progressing? It seems to me that knowing what is going on might help us understand what to do with this page. Ricktopher 06:49, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * While that would help with fleshing out this information, this article is still solely about this ongoing case, inappropriate, and unencyclopedic, violation of Wikipedia policy. IvoShandor 07:18, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm not so sure the weight is undue. While it may be true that Community of Christ outweighs the Restoration Branches in terms of number of members, it is quite likely that the Restoration Branches outweighs Community of Christ in terms of number of members who actually care about this issue.

Furthermore, since the article on Community of Christ has always been the place for RLDS history, why should the RLDS article suddenly have to have that history when ownership of the name is under dispute? Before the lawsuit ever began, this page should have been either be a list of groups or should have been for the purpose of listing RLDS history from before 1860 up to the name change to Community of Christ in 2001. To demand an entire history be put here all of the sudden when none was required here before is inconsistant. --75.43.30.3 14:29, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Are you even paying attention? This article was a redirect to Community of Christ before Aug 3 2007. It was created as a POV fork, and is a violation of policy, I am about an inch away from nominating it for deletion. It needs to be fixed, like yesterday.IvoShandor 22:38, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
 * This information, some of it anyway, belongs in Community of Christ or Restoration Branches, this should be obvious given you're other observations. IvoShandor 22:44, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Undue indeed. This page is little more than a flyer for the Restoration Branch cause, the way it reads now. The entire article is consumed with word for word statements from the Restoration Branch about this case. How this isn't a total disregard for Wikipedia policy is beyond me. IvoShandor 22:48, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Not to mention the COI of the creator. This thing has to go. IvoShandor 22:50, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Restoration of redirect
The name "Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints" was redirected on August 3, 2007 from Community of Christ to a separate article, which contravened an agreement reached a year earlier (see Talk:RLDS (disambiguation)) as a result of an offline discussion between representatives of the Community of Christ and Wikimedia Foundation. The redirect to the Community of Christ article is being restored. Information on the lawsuit can be merged into one or more of the articles listed at RLDS (disambiguation). --Blainster 09:24, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Um? What? The hell? IvoShandor 18:26, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Offline discussion? Very interesting. Was this a public or private meeting? It is rather a silly thing to fight over, but its mainly the PageRank which Wikipedia gets that makes it matter. So does trademark status dictate this kind of thing, even when the trademark is disputed? I mean, how does wikipedia handle trademark and copyright disputes? Perhaps the sort of content that was here belong(ed) in an article called "South Branch Case" or something. --BenMcLean (talk) 21:44, 3 January 2008 (UTC)