Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Singapore Mission


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete.  MBisanz  talk 00:04, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

The Singapore Mission

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

There's been general consensus in the past to not have articles for individual missions of the LDS Church. This is because there are hundreds of missions (340-odd) and the names and boundaries of them have changed many, many times over the course of the church's history. Rather, it's been decided that the information that would be found in such an article can be placed in Mission (LDS Church) and/or an article about the church in a specific country or territory. See some precedents for this here and here. In light of this, I have taken the information in this article and placed it in by-country articles: LDS Church in Singapore, LDS Church in Malaysia, and LDS Church in Sri Lanka. These articles are not sourced well because the article in question was not sourced well, but at least this nomination can solve the initial problem of another article about an LDS Church mission. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:02, 17 December 2008 (UTC) On the information presented, I think I;d probably agree with your analysis. I gather that the structure and organizations of the different mission territories are not particularly stable, and that would be another reason for using the broader unit. DGG (talk) 09:55, 18 December 2008 (UTC) 
 * Question We do accept articles on individual dioceses--indeed, individual bishops of the Roman Catholic, and anglican, and other territorial churches, and I am not sure on what basis we could decide not to do he same for every religion organised in such a way, with reasonable subdivisions. The suggestion must be that in some respect these geographic divisions of the LDS are in some sense less important. I'd assume that printed LDS sources about every one of them could be found, though its not the sort of thing I'm prepared to search for myself. DGG (talk) 03:05, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That's true, sources would be difficult to find for most; there are some, but almost universally they are self-published histories. Missions are somewhat different than dioceses, in that in most areas of the world they are simply a geographical division that full-time missionaries work in and are not part of the regular church heirarchy for members of the church living in those areas. (In areas with very few members, however, they do form part of the regular church heirarchy since the church has a lay ministry and the local leaders in these areas are drawn from the full-time missionary ranks, who are usually American expatriates. It's all kind of a convoluted structure and not consistent at all, as can be gleaned from Mission (LDS Church).) As someone with a little knowledge/experience in the area, it would be my opinion that a by-country article setup for the LDS Church would work much better—not only for the differences in jurisdiction that exist but also because of the relatively few number of members of this church worldwide. The church itself publishes an almanac which discusses the history of the church in a by-country and territory manner, not in a by-mission or other church unit fashion. (That's also the approach taken by the church's website.) But I am open to change, if that's wanted, and I don't want to force this approach on the unwilling. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:13, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Foxy Loxy  Pounce! 00:54, 22 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment A major difference, of course, between dioceses etc. (does the LDS Church use this term? Sorry that I can't remember either way) in Catholic, Anglican, etc. churches is that a bishop in those churches is one of the highest few clerics, overseeing a large number of priests and a large number of congregations, while an LDS bishop is much "lower in the hierarchy", having responsibility for a much smaller area.  Nyttend (talk) 14:30, 22 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Agree with Good Ol’factory's point on number of missions and instability of mission names and boundaries. But I am not sure about one article per country. They are sort of short, and we could end up with 180 of them. Maybe the content should be arranged by broader geographical area, such as South East Asia, Polynesia, Central America etc.? Aymatth2 (talk) 17:26, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree that may be preferable, and perhaps the articles I started could be merged somehow into broader articles. I was thinking one per country as the maximum finest level of break-down, not necessarily one that should happen in each case. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:59, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:59, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment somethign needs to be merged either we have country articles LDS Church in Singapore, LDS Church in Malaysia, etc. or this mission article and no country ones. I note that the mission has under 7000 members, so that it is hardly on the scale of an Anglican or RC diocese.  If kept, rename to Singapore Mission (Latter Day Saints) to make its scope clear.  A large number of items appearing as subheadings need to be coverted to bulleted text.  Peterkingiron (talk) 00:43, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.