Talk:Genesis

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was support for move on the basis that there does not appear to be a clear primary topic. Those opposing have not offered good evidence to the contrary and the simple fact that the Book of Genesis is the genesis of subsequent uses of "genesis" (couldn't resist) is not a good basis for what should occupy the title. Rather, we are concerned with the most people who navigate to Wikipedia's page named genesis ultimately reaching the target article they meant to arrive at among the many ambiguous topics that "genesis" could refer to, with the least hassle and confusion.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:18, 17 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Post close note: I have also performed a history swap—the non-trivial edit history of the page at genesis (which was redirected to Book of Genesis and previously to other targets) is now the history of Genesis (disambiguation).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:49, 17 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Genesis (disambiguation) → Genesis — Genesis refers to many things, and is redirecting to Genesis (disambiguation). It makes more sense for the "Genesis (disambiguation)" page to just be "Genesis" ThomasSixten (talk) 05:54, 10 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

• Oppose I think it's not unreasonable to venture that the Bible book is the primary topic, considering it came first chronologically and most of the other entries are named after it. --Cybercobra (talk) 07:38, 10 September 2009 (UTC)Reply
• Question. Is the nominator suggesting that Genesis currently redirects to Genesis (disambiguation)? Because it doesn't. It redirects to Book of Genesis. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 08:01, 10 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

"Genesis" currently redirects to Genesis (disambiguation). Considering that the term "Genesis" is often used in reference to things other than the bible, it makes sense that a search for "genesis" should redirect to this page.ThomasSixten (talk) 19:48, 10 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

No, it doesn't. Look at the page. It redirects to Book of Genesis. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 21:07, 10 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

• Support — completely ignoring where the redirect points (since the target is not stable), I think it makes more sense for Genesis to be a dab page than a redirect to Book of Genesis. --Una Smith (talk) 23:12, 10 September 2009 (UTC)Reply
  • The target has not moved since June 2009 so I don't understand why we're even debating where it redirects to. It's not like it has moved in the midst of this nomination. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:24, 10 September 2009 (UTC)Reply
    • Where Genesis redirects has been changed over and over again, for years. --Una Smith (talk) 23:35, 10 September 2009 (UTC)Reply
      • Sure, but that doesn't explain why the nominator stated twice on 10 Sep 2009 that it redirected to the DAB page. I'm just trying to figure out what the nominator means, or if they mean what I think they mean and have just made a mistake. That's why I asked the question in the first place. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:48, 10 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

• Oppose. My intuitive sense is that Book of Genesis is the primary meaning. I could be convinced otherwise with some hard data. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 23:25, 10 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

• Pop culture always seems to trump history: there are 1.18 million hits for genesis AND "rock band" and only 103 thousand for genesis AND "bible book" on Google (but don't give too much weight to these stats: this was only a very crude search). -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 14:46, 11 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

• Searching for "genesis bible" (without quotes) give 9.8 million hits. --Cybercobra (talk) 21:28, 11 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

• Support "genesis" as a word meaning origin (derived from the Bible) or the rock band would be equal to the Biblical meaning, so a dab page is best.76.66.196.139 (talk) 05:19, 11 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

• Support. While the Bible book may be the source of the word and the primary topic, it has grown to mean so much more. Moreover, why have "Genesis" just as a redirect when it can be used as a disambig page? When consensus is reached, let's make it move-protected to avoid constant flip-flopping. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 14:36, 11 September 2009 (UTC)Reply
  • If it is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC then it should either be at Genesis or Genesis should redirect to it. --Cybercobra (talk) 21:33, 11 September 2009 (UTC)Reply
• Support. While the Book of Genesis is obviously a very popular search target, I'm not convinced that it's a clear primary topic. Genesis (band), for example, gets twice as many page views as Book of Genesis,^[1][2] and as such the readers would on average benefit from the disambiguation page being at Genesis, in my opinion. I understand that the band name and just about everything on the disambiguation page derives from the usage in the Bible, but that by itself doesn't make something primary topic – being searched often by our readers does. Jafeluv (talk) 16:20, 17 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

The page history of Genesis is rather long and complicated. At the moment, the page has only 5 incoming links from article space. Someone must have disambiguated incoming links recently. --Una Smith (talk) 23:12, 10 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.