Unit website name restrictions updated?

[barkeraj]

I had a ward start a new website with the domain being their unit name. I went to the https://internet.churchofjesuschrist.org/ site to quote them the rules that I expected to say:

The website, blog, or social media profile should not simply be the name of a Church unit or individual. For example, “First Ward News” and “Friends of the First Ward” are acceptable names, but “First Ward” and “Bishop Davis” are not.

but instead found it says

The name may include a ward or stake name. However, it may not include the official name of the Church.

I didn't find any chatter here on the forum, so wanted to see if you all are reading what I am reading. It no longer needs to be CityFirstWardNews.com but can just be CityFirstWard.com... right?

[sbradshaw]

I don't have any inside information, but that's how I read it as well. To me, there's not much difference between "First Ward News" and "First Ward" in terms of conveying to the person reading whether or not it's official, so if it is an intentional change, I'm in favor of the simplification!

[russellhltn]

As I recall, there was a section of examples of valid and invalid uses of the internet. That might have been one of the examples. But those examples are missing now.

[jonesrk]

Expanding your quote from https://internet.churchofjesuschrist.org/ it says:

The online resource should have a purpose and goal and be named accordingly. The name may include a ward or stake name.

Emphasis added.

To me that says that the name of the ward may be part of the domain, but the purpose or goal would also be a part of the name.