686:, as it is in essence the presentation of an extended primary text with detailed information about every part (assuming people add more verses...) - I saw a large article which did not contain much information that can't be found in other Knowledge articles - and yet it covered so little of what could be said about the verse. If this keeps going, it will engulf Knowledge. On Wikisource though, something in the style of the Mishna project (see
211:. This Bible verse is enormously influential, of course, but there are dozens of extremely important and influential verses (where there are not nearly so many important and influential primary schools), but the question is at least as taxonomical as priority. Also, we have the entire Bible in Wikisource, so there is no need to have a chapter/verse call. The verse can be read at Wikisource.
495:
photographs uploaded to the
Knowledge commons. There is no problem of article collision, because no other article will be wanting to use those titles. I have no problem with having an article on each verse for each religion either. Why can't there be ten or even a hundred articles on each verse? Disk space is cheap.
424:, which would cover a more comprehensible part of the Book. The whole Bible could quite probably be covered sensibly in this way, whereas covering it verse by verse would not be particularly sensible (how much can you say on "Jesus wept" (John 11:35) without referring to the chapters on either side of it?).
783:
The key overarching point of my proposal has been reverted/removed already. I had restructured the article to differentiate scholarly vs. religious views, and -- within religious views -- between
Christian and Jewish (and Moslem, etc). Instead, the article showing now has sections entitled "Analysis"
772:
substantially. Hopefully it is an improvement w/NPOV. (Except I am unable to do justice to the subsection on
Christian exegesis, please edit and add.) I already voted to keep articles by key verse(s). The rewrite attempts to demonstrate why the article should not be merged (esp not w/Creationism) and
498:
R1w's argument is spurious. Deleting Bible verse 'to manitain NPOV' is silly - shall we delete articles on US TV episodes to maintain NPOV with other cultures, which don't have so many entries? The Bible has had an enormous cultural, religious and literary impact, rivaled by no religious text (other
494:
We have an article on every day of the year, and on every year, and on every tiny town in the United states, and on every minor character of many TV shows, books, films, and comic strips. What slippery slope were you concerned about? There is plenty of storage space. There were thousands of
407:
and improve the article. Scholarship, philosophy and exegesis on this verse (and numerous others) is broad and diverse enough to warrant an encyclopedia article (albeit a specialized encyclopedia, like much else in wikipedia). Don't reduce the whole issue to a matter of +/- creationism.
499:
than the Qu'ran). There are fewer verses than schools in the US - and I suspect most of them (and certainly Gen 1:1) are more universaly notable. (I do, however, think that the parrallel translations should be deleted). Do not redirect to creationist debates - that would be POV! --
796:
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages.
478:
This verse is interesting on its own without regard to creation. For example notes about some of the words in the verse and their meaning, why the Torah starts with the letter Beis, why the specific name of God is used, etc.
656:. We are not voting whether every verse needs an article, we are voting on this verse and it deserves an article. At its current length, I do not think it would be user friendly to merge this into a longer article.
681:
In terms of the Bible verses articles (a perfect eg of a content issue!), my opinion (to get some list of opinions started) is that they are a waste of time/space on
Knowledge. Something like this belongs more on
482:
Because, Ezra, then WP, in order to maintain NPOV, will have to have a separate article on every chapter and verse (or analogous) of every single religious text on the planet. Seems beyond the scope to
467:
Agree with the general principle. Why shouldn't there be an article on every verse? I have always thought that separating
Knowledge into Wikisource, etc., was somewhat arbitrary anyway. --
784:(aka Christian w/some academic) and "Jewish interpretation", with attendant POV issues. If you are interested, my proposed structure and initial implementation may be seen in the history
518:
I am hotly in favor of of keeping commentary articles on Bible verses. I completely disagree with any attempt to cast this as creationist article only. You could just as well redirect to
243:. While interesting in its own regard, if Knowledge had an article on every single Bible verse it would just get ridiculous. This might warrant its own Bible Wiki, or something, though.
698:) and concise summaries of commentaries, the uses of the verse in Jewish texts etc would be a good idea and I'd probably like to contribute to those. As it stands, I think
773:
why such articles would be useful to keep. It also conforms somewhat to the format proposed in the Talk section on 1:1. Would welcome more such Talk.
609:. This article says nothing that couldn't be said there. Giving the text in 10 different translations is a job for Wikisource, not an encyclopedia. -
589:
363:
300:
224:
55:
Despite the importance of this verse in creationist theory, I hotly oppose a
Knowledge article on individual verses of the Bible. We already have
420:
Aren't many
Biblical verses grouped together on Knowledge? I see nothing wrong with this and the following item being merged and redirecting to
367:
379:
Well, no. A simpsons episode can be proven to have occurred. Sure, the VFDs you cited are "precedents," but they are bad precedents.
630:
into articles covering groups of verses. Unless someone is able to expand this into a larger article without overstepping the NPOV.
668:...this is an important verse in western civilization and has far reaching influences outside of the creation/evolution debates.
31:
Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
17:
564:
549:
533:
284:
240:
208:
141:
87:
691:
195:
Bible verse) is at least as influential as a primary school (and I have nothing against primary schools btw) --
123:
into an appropriate article, either as suggested by duncharris (despite his uncalled-for statement) or into
248:
161:
42:
503:
199:
777:
753:
740:
709:
660:
648:
613:
595:
583:
571:
555:
540:
506:
471:
459:
438:
412:
393:
374:
333:
307:
291:
261:
252:
231:
215:
202:
164:
148:
131:
113:
98:
77:
736:
Wikisource is not an encyclopedia. Also the bible is not a textbook, so wikibooks is not appropriate.
103:
That is quite untrue. They have theories on how the Bible can be harmonised with scientific findings.
156:. Good article overall but it could do with actual references in place of 'some believe that..." --
95:
552:
421:
727:
431:
108:
72:
342:
750:
645:
488:
383:
356:
244:
157:
38:
271:. More than enough scholorship available to create an encyclopedic article on this verse. --
500:
196:
180:
145:
27:
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below.
619:
606:
568:
346:
91:
637:
537:
523:
724:
610:
519:
468:
456:
446:
425:
355:! Bad precedent to start articles about individual scriptures/superstitious beliefs.
288:
104:
68:
592:
580:
769:
706:
657:
316:
299:
and expand this article on an incredibly important and influential Bible verse.
273:
212:
176:
49:
695:
370:. Also a Bible verse seems to be nearly as encyclopedic as a Simpsons episode.
737:
701:
683:
669:
390:
371:
304:
258:
228:
128:
641:
330:
56:
730:
746:
788:
774:
409:
124:
690:
as an example) (with user contributed public domain translations, see
389:
I'm pretty sure it can be proven that someone wrote
Genesis 1.1.
745:
Books other than textbooks might be fine. Wikibooks already has
579:
and I'm sure this could be expanded. I agree with
Decumanus.
696:
http://en.wikibooks.org/Wikibooks:The_Open_Mishnah_Project
487:
before it's too late and WP slides down a slippery slope.
785:
687:
315:and compliments to Neutrality on the good work. -
588:This should probably be mentioned on this page.
341:. I wrote the article. Ridiculous nomination.
90:. btw, creationists don't have any theories.
8:
59:, and even that is borderline. It should be
362:We already have many precedents, including
764:In the beginning ... of a proposed rewrite
590:Knowledge:Votes for deletion/Matthew 2:16
7:
368:Knowledge:Votes for deletion/John 20
67:erged with articles on creationism.
692:Wikibooks:The Open Mishnah Project
189:- a bible verse (and particularly
172:... but if you absolutely have to
24:
723:, the Bible is a book isn't it?)
325:as long as the article contains
688:http://en.wikibooks.org/Mishnah
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
787:of the article. Best wishes,
1:
565:Creation according to Genesis
550:Creation according to Genesis
534:Creation according to Genesis
285:Creation according to Genesis
257:What would be so ridiculous?
241:Creation according to Genesis
209:Creation according to Genesis
142:Creation according to Genesis
88:Creation according to Genesis
33:The result of the debate was
799:Please do not edit this page
768:Just revised the article on
29:This page is no longer live.
818:
733:08:19, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
700:deletion or relocation to
491:04:22, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
386:04:15, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
359:00:44, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
345:gets 103,000 Google hits.
136:No content worth merging.
622:08:00, May 31, 2005 (UTC)
476:Addendum against merging:
449:03:33, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
349:00:41, May 27, 2005 (UTC)
319:23:36, May 26, 2005 (UTC)
303:has also been mentioned.
277:23:19, May 26, 2005 (UTC)
778:17:03, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
754:13:40, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
741:08:23, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
710:11:47, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
661:22:34, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
649:14:15, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
614:03:00, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
596:12:46, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
584:02:54, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
572:11:54, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
556:07:24, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
541:05:22, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
526:05:22, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
507:13:31, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
472:04:11, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
460:04:08, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
439:01:27, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
413:01:12, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
394:06:46, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
375:01:04, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
334:00:05, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
308:23:33, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
292:23:22, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
262:23:33, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
253:23:17, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
232:21:54, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
216:21:28, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
203:21:12, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
165:20:55, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
149:16:16, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
132:16:10, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
114:20:02, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
99:16:03, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
78:15:53, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
672:20:26, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
45:), 05:15, 9 June 2005
455:Notable bible verse.
640:projects in English
677:Why not Wikisource?
364:WP:VFD/Matthew 2:16
329:and not just text.
301:WP:VFD/Matthew 2:16
225:WP:VFD/Matthew 2:16
705:is the way to go.
638:b:Biblical Studies
618:Eleven, actually.
546:Merge and redirect
237:Merge and redirect
437:
111:
75:
809:
715:Excellent idea.
636:. There do live
563:and redirect to
532:and redirect to
434:
429:
109:
73:
817:
816:
812:
811:
810:
808:
807:
806:
805:
766:
679:
607:Book of Genesis
432:
53:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
815:
813:
804:
803:
792:
791:
765:
762:
761:
760:
759:
758:
757:
756:
678:
675:
674:
673:
663:
651:
631:
625:
624:
623:
600:
599:
598:
574:
558:
553:Kaibabsquirrel
543:
527:
513:
512:
511:
510:
509:
496:
462:
450:
441:
415:
402:
401:
400:
399:
398:
397:
396:
350:
336:
320:
310:
294:
278:
266:
265:
264:
234:
218:
205:
184:
167:
151:
134:
118:
117:
116:
52:
47:
32:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
814:
802:
800:
794:
793:
790:
786:
782:
781:
780:
779:
776:
771:
763:
755:
752:
751:Puzzlet Chung
748:
744:
743:
742:
739:
735:
734:
732:
729:
726:
722:
718:
714:
713:
712:
711:
708:
704:
703:
697:
693:
689:
685:
676:
671:
667:
664:
662:
659:
655:
652:
650:
647:
646:Puzzlet Chung
643:
639:
635:
632:
629:
626:
621:
617:
616:
615:
612:
608:
604:
601:
597:
594:
591:
587:
586:
585:
582:
578:
575:
573:
570:
566:
562:
559:
557:
554:
551:
547:
544:
542:
539:
535:
531:
528:
525:
521:
520:Paradise Lost
517:
514:
508:
505:
502:
497:
493:
492:
490:
486:
481:
480:
477:
473:
470:
466:
463:
461:
458:
454:
451:
448:
445:
442:
440:
436:
435:
427:
423:
422:Genesis 1:1-5
419:
416:
414:
411:
406:
403:
395:
392:
388:
387:
385:
382:
378:
377:
376:
373:
369:
365:
361:
360:
358:
354:
351:
348:
344:
343:"Genesis 1:1"
340:
337:
335:
332:
328:
324:
321:
318:
314:
311:
309:
306:
302:
298:
295:
293:
290:
286:
282:
279:
276:
275:
270:
267:
263:
260:
256:
255:
254:
251:
250:
246:
242:
238:
235:
233:
230:
226:
222:
219:
217:
214:
210:
206:
204:
201:
198:
194:
193:
188:
185:
182:
178:
175:
171:
168:
166:
163:
159:
155:
152:
150:
147:
143:
139:
135:
133:
130:
126:
122:
119:
115:
112:
106:
102:
101:
100:
97:
93:
89:
85:
82:
81:
80:
79:
76:
70:
66:
62:
58:
51:
48:
46:
44:
40:
36:
30:
19:
798:
795:
767:
720:
716:
699:
680:
665:
653:
633:
627:
602:
576:
560:
545:
529:
515:
484:
475:
464:
452:
443:
430:
417:
404:
380:
352:
338:
326:
322:
312:
296:
280:
272:
268:
247:
236:
223:. See also
220:
207:Redirect to
191:
190:
186:
173:
169:
158:Tony Sidaway
153:
137:
120:
83:
64:
60:
54:
39:Mindspillage
34:
28:
26:
770:Genesis 1:1
146:Mike Rosoft
50:Genesis 1:1
747:b:Jokebook
717:Wikisource
702:Wikisource
684:Wikisource
620:Neutrality
569:JamesBurns
347:Neutrality
63:eleted or
721:wikibooks
642:Wikibooks
634:Transwiki
538:Megan1967
524:Decumanus
57:Psalm 119
611:Nunh-huh
603:Redirect
469:Ezra Wax
457:Klonimus
447:Dsmdgold
426:Grutness
418:Redirect
289:Carnildo
245:Hermione
138:Redirect
605:to the
593:Falphin
581:Falphin
381:Delete.
327:content
125:Genesis
728:adiant
707:Frikle
658:DS1953
522:. --
485:Delete
353:Delete
317:SimonP
274:Allen3
213:Geogre
177:Beta m
738:Kappa
670:KHM03
628:Merge
561:Merge
530:Merge
391:Kappa
372:Kappa
305:Kappa
283:with
281:Merge
259:Kappa
229:Jonel
227:. --
174:merge
129:M412k
121:Merge
86:with
84:merge
16:<
749:. --
719:(or
666:Keep
654:Keep
644:. --
577:Keep
516:Keep
465:Keep
453:Keep
444:Keep
433:wha?
405:Keep
366:and
339:Keep
331:IZAK
323:Keep
313:Keep
297:Keep
287:. --
269:Keep
249:1980
221:Keep
192:this
187:Keep
181:talk
170:Keep
162:Talk
154:Keep
144:. -
110:T@lk
92:Dunc
74:T@lk
43:talk
37:. –
35:keep
694:at
548:to
504:(?)
501:Doc
489:Rlw
483:me.
428:...
384:Rlw
357:Rlw
239:to
200:(?)
197:Doc
140:to
127:.--
105:JFW
69:JFW
789:HG
775:HG
731:_*
567:.
536:.
410:HG
107:|
71:|
801:.
725:R
474:-
183:)
179:(
160:|
96:☺
94:|
65:m
61:d
41:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.