"I have been following this edit war and feel I should chime in.  Both of you have made good points, but obviously there are still unsettled issues.  First, the Eyring talk used as a reference is referring to a future event, not a current one.  So, saying this is a reference for LDS General Authorities referring to BYU as ""the Lord's University"" is a stretch.  The concept of ""the Lord's University"" Eyring is referring to comes from the quote of Charles H. Malik about a future university the Lord would be comfortable in returning to along with a quote from Spencer W. Kimball ""Surely BYU can help to respond to that call!""  It is certainly accurate to say that the Church and BYU see that as the destiny and mission of the school, but nowhere in this talk does it state that BYU is currently ""the Lord's University.""  Elder Eyring offers counsel on how to achieve that, but again, it is in reference to a future event.  Even identifying BYU as a ""consecrated place,"" Elder Eyring states in the closing paragraph: 

 :""The journey toward being a consecrated place is a long one. We have not arrived, but we are moving on the path. Those everyday tasks to which you now will give your allbecause you give your allare changing this school, and they are allowing the Lord to make a change in you. There will be tests aheadnot because God doubts us but because He loves us. I have every confidence that we will pass the tests and that surely BYU will respond to the call to be a consecrated place, as President Smith and President Kimball knew we would."" (emphasis added) 

 Now, the term ""the Lord's University"" is used quite a bit, particularly at BYU, in the western U.S., and among BYU alumni.  I did not hear the term, however, growing up LDS in Ohio until I attended school at BYU-Idaho where it was in reference to BYU-Idaho, not BYU.  However, I have never heard the term stated in any official form at General Conference or in a Church publication. 

 While I am of the opinion that use of the term ""the Lord's University"" has arrogant applications and assumptions, particularly to non-LDS and LDS who choose to attend different universities (the U of U included!), it is not documented enough to include in an article yet (so I see both sides of that edit disagreement).  I'm also not opposed to including these ""scholars"" that are mentioned because they are likely LDS scholars who have published books or articles on the topic using scriptural and/or teachings of LDS leaders in their study.  After all, this is still an encyclopedia, not the Ensign, so other views need to be included; not just the official church view. 
    

 "