Talk:Parley P. Pratt

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Importance[edit]

Parley P. Pratt was one of a small number of founding members of the Latter Day Saint movement serving in senior positions in the church during critical times in his history. He was a dynamic leader in expanding the church's influence in the United States and Europe. His theological articles and hymns are well known to modern members of the movement. He was a leader of the LDS Church's western migration and the settlement of Mormon communities in Utah and the surrounding states.

Revised topic paragraph to read: "Parley Parker Pratt was a leader in the Latter Day Saint movement and an original member of The Quorum of Twelve Apostles from 1835 until his murder in 1857. He served in the Quorum with his younger brother, Orson Pratt. He was a productive missionary, religious writer and longtime editor of the religious publication The Latter-day Saints' Millennial Star."

See: Latter Day Saint movement Comments welcome. WBardwin 01:59, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for adding this; I think this sort of information should come first, to explain to someone not versed in LDS history why Pratt is important. It wasn't clear to me from skimming through the article who he was, other than an early member of the church, which is why I put the {{explain-significance}} tag on it. --Dcfleck 03:10, 2005 May 3 (UTC)

It looks pretty clear to me now. I am removing explain-significance. I am making a notice of this principle to the WP:LDS project. Tom Haws 15:23, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

Burial[edit]

The anon contribution below moved from article. Worth restating? IMO - a simple "and was buried in Alma, Arkansas" would probably do. WBardwin 02:10, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For those who wish to visit Parley P. Pratt's grave, please contact the Chamber of Commerce Web site for Alma, Arkansas. They will down load photo and diections to Pratt's well maintained burial site near Alma which is well maintained.

NPOV isses[edit]

I have some NPOV concerns with the section on Pratt's death.

  1. To say that he "seduced" the wife of the other man is a bit loaded. We don't know who did the "seducing"—maybe she seduced him. It's simple and neutral enough to just say they were married; or, since the marriage was not legal, to say that they were "sealed" or underwent a "celestial marriage" or a "religious marriage" or a "plural marriage".
  2. To say that characterizing his death as a religious martyrdom is a "mischaracterization" does not retain NPOV. Some clearly characterize him as a martyr. We should explain the facts of what happened and let readers decide the merits of any characterizations. — Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:54, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but your edits must match the cited reference. Bagley used the word seduced. Trasel (talk) 23:01, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And if other cited edits are provided that do not use the word "seduced"? And point #2? Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:08, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Incidentally, I've begun searching through the Bagley book, and I can't find him using the word "seduced" to describe this incident. What page number? Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:18, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mitt Romney[edit]

I'm not sure if it's really notable enough that Mitt Romney is a PPP descendant. Any sixth or seventh generation Mormon could point out that a great deal of the population in the Salt Lake Valley alone carry his bloodline. Heck, I am but one of his many many many *many* descendants. Why? He was a polygamist with many wives who had many children. Couple that with how many generations between him and the latest generation and you have a whole bucketful of Pratt blood running about. I don't think it's really significant that Mitt Romney is his great great grandson.

I found this out in 4th grade back in Welby Elementary in South Jordan when my teacher asked the PPP descendants to raise their hands and well over a third of the hands went up, including mine. PPP descendancy isn't that uncommon in Utah, and really isn't that noteworthy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.117.239.16 (talk) 05:12, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Death[edit]

The following was removed from the article text itself & placed here on the talk page, where it belongs. -- 208.81.184.4 (talk) 16:16, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, the remaining portion here has little to do with Pratt's ==Death== and is largely a Mormon perspective of Pratt within the Mormon religion and Mormonism's larger place in society in general. Either consider creating a new section on that topic or remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.166.80.139 (talk • contribs) 17:13, 8 January 2012‎

Personality subsection[edit]

A recent IP edit drew my attention to the Personality subsection of the article. It consists of two sentences that paint Pratt as "dour and humorless", "antisocial", inept, a liar, and "remarkably insensitive". The sentences are sourced to three different pages (396, 237, 276) from a book by Givens and Grow that looks like a pretty good source, making me think that this may be an instance of cherry-picking. Judging by the book description, editorial, and customer reviews here, these snippets don't seem to capture the essence of the book, though the Wikipedia paragraph bears a striking resemblance to a recent customer review, quoting it almost word for word (or perhaps the other way around) and citing the exact same pages.

Any ideas on how to fix this section? ~Adjwilley (talk) 16:21, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That section, and a number of other edits where all added in this range of edits. What's interesting is how much material in those edits is nearly identical to that one review (and not just the Personality section). Note that the date of the review is March 11, while that range of edits was made March 16-18, so either the WP edits were copied from the recent customer review, or both are copying from a third earlier review, or the reviewer and WP editor are the same. Certain evidence strongly suggests the latter. How to fix it - we need to look through the book and see if it is case of biased cherry-picking and provide a more even-handed summary based on that source, and/or get additional sources. --FyzixFighter (talk) 19:16, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Based on what I've read about Pratt, there was a lot more to his personality than being a dour, humorless, antisocial, inept, remarkably insensitive liar (though he may have been all of the above at one time or another). Perhaps another solution would be to get rid of the two-sentence section and spread the material out to where it's relevant. For instance, the part about him being "remarkably insensitive" could be moved to the section on his family (since it was talking about that in the context of his wives). I don't have the book, but we could use the page numbers from the Amazon review to match each bit to the page where it's cited. Obviously a better solution would be to get the book, read it, and fill out the section, but I don't have a huge interest in Pratt at the moment, and no section at all would be better than this odd selection/synthesis of negative personality traits. ~Adjwilley (talk) 21:21, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The "dour and humorless" quote is actually "but his contemporaries, as in the Richmond jail, often found him dour and humorless." To pick out the "dour and humorless" without including mention of Richmond jail is to excise the quote from its context.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:27, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is a horribly written article[edit]

This article focuses way to much on Pratt's death and family, and way to little on his life and work. I have began trying to better its sections on his life and work. He wrote a lot more than just poems and an autobiography for example.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:45, 7 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quotes should be in context[edit]

This articles seems to attract out-of-context quoting. Someone picked up the "antisocial bent" words from Givens and Grow, p. 237. This is two words taken out the quote "At least part of Pratt's antisocial bent was likely more a function of his ineptness than his theology." The out-of-context attack phrasing where people pick up a phrase and act as if this is what was really being said seems to be a stretch.John Pack Lambert (talk) 08:02, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't G&G still saying that Pratt had an "antisocial bent", though? The article used to say (before you deleted it): "According to the authors Terry L. Givens and Matthew J. Grow, Pratt was often 'dour and humorless,' with an 'antisocial bent,' ...". Based on the source, this seems to me to be an accurate quote. It doesn't seem to me to be an attack on anyone, either by the original authors or by the WP article. It seems to me to be a description of one of Pratt's personality traits. It's OK to mention positive things and other things which may be interpreted by some as not-as-positive: this article isn't meant to be hagiography, as you might read in the Ensign. Good Ol’factory (talk) 09:16, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I still do not see where you get the "insensitive" quote. I have read through the three pages, the closes I can come is "Intensitiy, rather than joviality, dominated his public and private personas". Givens and Gorw, p. 396-397. I do not see them use the word "insensitive" on any of those pages.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:27, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • That must be an editor's interpretation of something on those pages. It should be removed if there is nothing there specifically on point. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:21, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the insensitive bit came from any of the pages listed. That seems to have been the Wikipedia editor's interpretation based partially on the fact that one of Pratt's wives, who shared his bed while in prison, later divorced him despite remaining a Mormon. (Don't ask me how I know this.) ~Adjwilley (talk) 23:51, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The "shared his bed while in prison" line also seems to be an interpolation. At least in the listed quoted pages Givens and Grow never say that Parley and Mary Ann "shared a bed" while in prison. They say she joined Parley in prison, but do not talk about sharing a bed.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:54, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Zion's Camp[edit]

I was wondering how much I should put in about Zion's Camp. Givens and Grow mention that Pratt was largely an outrider to the group, involved in recruiting additional people as it marched, p. 68. On p. 69 they mention that Pratt along with Orson Hyde was sent as an emissary to Governor Dunklin, and then returned with the message that Dunklin would not support the Mormons efforts to regain their lands in Jackson County, p. 69. I am not sure how best or even if to incorporate these points into the article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:52, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Creator of writing system?[edit]

This article includes Category:Creators of writing systems. I could not find in the article what writing system he created. Does anyone know what it is (and why it's not in the article?) Thanks, Bahooka (talk) 17:32, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See: Deseret alphabet. It's mention in section "Life in Utah". —Asterisk*Splat→ 21:20, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Bahooka (talk) 21:23, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth Brotherton quote[edit]

I've removed this text again because the cited URL failed verification. The URL looks badly formed, and I tried fixing the obvious typo but still got a "page not found" error. Even if we did have a good URL, there are other issues. For example, the quote seems completely out of context with the surrounding sentences - which mission was this during? When was this seven month period relative to the Chile mission and other missions? This is also appears to be a quote from a primary source. Has a secondary source found this quote notable or important? Why this quote? It almost looks like a particular POV is being pushed by cherry-picking from a primary source, which is why WP:RS recommends secondary sources. Before adding it back in, we need to resolve both the URL verification and the POV/Primary source issues. --FyzixFighter (talk) 02:59, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for fixing the link (you can see here how malformed the link was in comparison to the current working link). However, the WP:PSTS and overall contextual, if not POV, concerns remains. The overall paragraph is severely disjointed with that addition. Again it appears like this may be a cherry-picked quote to push a narrative not found in a secondary source. Please explain why you think this quote is necessary, and how you see it fitting in the paragraph before re-adding. --FyzixFighter (talk) 01:42, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That link worked just fine several times. Then suddenly that site, owned by the Pratt family was taken down. Logic would tell me something's afoot. Of course, they can take down whatever they want, but the timing of the removal seems suspect. Why don't you think the impact on Pratt's family as he left on a mission is relevant here? I can clarify dates, but for a man with 11 wives, you hear virtually nothing about his family life and their extreme suffering on this site. Why is this not relevant?Thewholetruthnothingbut (talk) 17:25, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer the simple explanation as opposed to a Mormon Smokescreen Cabal conspiracy theory. My guess is that when you previously typed in the link in your edits, you made a few typos - for example not including a hyphen in the web address and duplicating about half of the URL - in those previous edits. The link in your last edit did work. To help clarify, here are the two versions of the link you added:
Can you see the difference? The first one didn't work, but the last one did.
Remember the onus is on the editor adding text, therefore why do you think the impact on Pratt's family is relevant here? More specifically, do you have a secondary source that discusses more about his family life, particularly the impact Pratt's mission had on his family and why it's important? We rarely edit based on primary sources, because it is too easy to fall into the trap (or be accused of) cherry-picking quotes out of context to push the reader to a particular conclusion. As editors at wikipedia, we do not participate in the debate, we only report it. If mainstream historians find it important, then we should be able to easily find a good secondary source. If instead it's a minority or personal view, then we won't. --FyzixFighter (talk) 00:13, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Parley P. Pratt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:31, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parley_P._Pratt&oldid=1216424393"