Important notice: The article title adheres to the Neutral Point of View policy and the Words to Avoid guideline. Furthermore, it reflects the consensus among editors here and has been discussed several times in the past. Before starting another discussion about the article title, please consult the above policy and guideline, and read through the archives to see if your concern has already been addressed.
This article is supported by WikiProject Mythology. This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.MythologyWikipedia:WikiProject MythologyTemplate:WikiProject MythologyMythology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Creationism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Creationism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CreationismWikipedia:WikiProject CreationismTemplate:WikiProject CreationismCreationism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
The meaning of "myth", in the context of this article's title, can be found in wikt:myth:
A traditional story which embodies a belief regarding some fact or phenomenon of experience, and in which often the forces of nature and of the soul are personified; a sacred narrative regarding a god, a hero, the origin of the world or of a people, etc.
This article is substantially duplicated by a piece in an external publication. Please do not flag this article as a copyright violation of the following source:
Miller, F. P., Vandome, A. F., & McBrewster, J. (2010), Mythical origins of language: Origin of language, mythology, oral tradition, deluge myth, creator deity, creation myth, confusion of tonges, Tower of Babel, VDM Publishing House{{citation}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present.
Requested move 4 June 2023
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Creation myth → Creation narrative – The current title of this article isn't exactly neutral, I know that technically the usage of the term "myth" in this article is using the far less common definition, "a traditional story consisting of events that are ostensibly historical, though often supernatural, explaining the origins of a cultural practice or natural phenomenon", and not the common definition, "something that is false". However, as stated previously, it is the far less common definition, so people may often take the title the wrong way when seeing it. I propose the title "Creation narrative" instead so the title is more obviously neutral to all active religions that have creation stories. It is also much more convenient for editors and readers to not have a lengthy explanation on why the usage of "myth" is neutral, and it allows articles to be more concise as they do not have to waste space with explanations. This naming has already been in use for a while in 3 other articles: Genesis creation narrative (in use for 13 years), Korean creation narratives (in use since article creation 3 years ago), and Tenrikyo creation narrative (in use since article creation 5 years ago). – Treetoes023 (talk) 04:21, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - you are picking out one word that you don't like, but we need to look at the title as a whole. I'll start however by noting that we have articles on Christian mythology, Islamic mythology etc. Also, Category:Creation myths includes 44 links using myth and only 4 using narrative. I note that the Tenrikyo article even says "The Tenrikyo creation narrative is the creation myth of the Tenrikyo relig[ion." which means the title should call it what the article itself says it is. An ordinary Google search for "Creation narrative" throws up about 161,000 hits, while "Creation myth" produces about 1,030,000. Using Google scholar, it's about 12,500 to 38,700. I have no idea why you didn't check this - have you read WP:Common name? Alsoi, is there a reason you haven't suggested renaming other articles? Eg. Ancient Egyptian creation myths which you've also edited? Doug Wellertalk11:50, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - The sources in the article (as well as Scholar and Books searches) certainly show that the current title is the unambiguous WP:COMMONNAME, so I'm not sure how the title isn't neutral. A colloquial misunderstanding of the meaning of a word does not give cause to accommodate that misunderstanding; we certainly wouldn't rename Theory of relativity just because the meaning of scientific theory is sometimes misunderstood. - Aoidh (talk) 12:13, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Creation myths are the topic. I can't speak to any other "creation narrative" title, but the Genesis one is that way in order to keep the article tightly focused on the text and its interpretation. That is, the Genesis creation narrative is a text, a passage within a book. Srnec (talk) 02:08, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the statement made by Treetoes023 that the term “creation narrative” is more neutral (and should be used) and that the term “myth” is not. TRINITYNTB (talk) 20:24, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Big Bang as a Creation Myth
The Big Bang narrative is for sure a Creation Myth, since it's a folk symbolic/metaphoric narrative of a scientific hypothesis.
For reference:
