Talk:Descent from Adam and Eve

speedy deletion tag?
The only interesting facet of this goose chase is in documenting who has engaged in it: as it stands the article fails this simple test. The sensible adult inquires where have such "genealogies" been printed? A normal question is, does anyone engage in this pursuit who is not a Mormon?--Wetman (talk) 07:35, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Regarding the first concern, many of such genealogies have not been printed (but exist in the internet, as is this genealogy presented in the article:, and probably also exist offline, out of our reach), and of those printed, they may have not been published for the public but kept for themselvs and their family to look at. Nevertheless, there is a published book called "For All Our Grandfathers" (now cited in the article) which features the genealogy from living people to Adam and Eve.


 * A for the second question, of the now 2 claims in the article, I don't think the propagators are Mormons. Anyways, tracing a genealogy back to Adam and Eve is a feat that all believers in biblical Genesis can consider, not just Mormons (though Mormons are known for their genealogical research)


 * I'm not sure if I addressed your concerns correctly. It would be great if you could be a bit more specefic/develop a bit more on what basic requirements this article lacks. ♠  TomasBat   17:13, 13 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I thought God eliminated all mankind save for Noah and his family with the great flood...so that is the farthest back anybody could possibly trace their genealogy with certainty. (Not that I believe even that, but whatever.  Boy I hope this article gets deleted.) 207.237.33.83 (talk) 05:03, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Just speaking for myself, I find the article hilarious and entertaining, if ultimately preposterous. But that it takes note of those who believe such nonsense is grounds for its existence on wikipedia. So what if the Emperor has no clothes? MarmadukePercy (talk) 05:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * If that's the case, the article should not be on the "Descent from Adam and Eve" but on "Tracing a Descent from Adam and Eve". Otherwise, let it go quickly to uncyclopedia.wikia.com  207.237.228.203 (talk) 12:01, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Why this article should not be deleted
This article is clearly an article about the activitiy of tracing one's ancestry back to Adam and Eve. While I totally agree that that activity is ridiculous, this article is not. Would an article on the Flat Earth Society or trainspotting be deleted? I think not.

I can see nothing in this article that warrants deletion. It is written in an objective style, etc. etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lyphatma (talk • contribs) 05:13, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I removed the speedy deletion templates because the article doesn't qualify. "Patent nonsense" only applies to "incoherent text or gibberish", not "implausible theories, or hoaxes". Anyone who still wants it deleted would have to go through AFD. --Ptcamn (talk) 05:24, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, it's certainly nonsense. As the one who added the speedy-deletion tag, though, I'll step back - it may have some value in the same sense that other nonsensical human endeavors may yet have encyclopedic value. Mark Shaw (talk) 05:46, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I would suggest that sources 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 are not reliable, and for this reason alone this article should be deleted. How it ever made front page is insanity. 207.237.228.203 (talk) 11:49, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sources 2, 3, and 4 make NO mention of Adam or Eve, and source 2 is an advertisement for a book with was supposedly published in Dec 2008 - but which I can not find available online anywhere. 207.237.228.203 (talk) 11:49, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I attempted a revised lead but am not thrilled with it. The article seems to be about some who hold monogenesis as their belief and attempt to prove it through admittedly questionable genealogical records. However I can't find any WP:RS to bring the article into line with WP:V, so not sure how to further improve it. - LuckyLouie (talk) 17:19, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Does anyone speak English here? In this case you will note that "Generations of Adam" is the exact same topic as "Descent from Adam". "Eve" is implied. This title should just be a redirect. --dab (𒁳) 17:22, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * COMPLETELY AGREE. Do it.  207.237.228.203 (talk) 00:42, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Reliable sourcing
The vast majority of this article is unsourced or sourced to self published manuscripts. I question the following content:


 * 1) Using "JUDAH'S SCEPTRE AND JOSEPH'S BIRTHRIGHT" to source factual claims about "Irish tradition," or "Legend,"
 * 2) The entire section on political significane requires a source. Hipocrite (talk) 12:54, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Dayan family tree

 * -    Adam.
 * -    Seth.
 * -    Enosh.
 * -    Cainan.
 * -    Mahalaleel.
 * -    Jared.
 * -    Enoch.
 * -    Methuselah.
 * -    Lamech.
 * -    Noah.
 * -    Shem.
 * -    Arpachshad.
 * -    Cainan.
 * -    Shelah.
 * -    Eber.
 * -    Peleg.
 * -    Reu.
 * -    Serug.
 * -    Nahor.
 * -	Terah.
 * -	Abram:Abraham. [Married Sarai:Sarah his half-sister, likely a daughter of Terah]
 * -	Isaac.
 * -	Jacob:Israel.
 * -	Judah.
 * -	Perez.
 * -	Hezron.
 * -	Ram.
 * -	Amminadab.
 * -	Nahshon.
 * -	Salmon.
 * -	Boaz (by Ra´hab).
 * -	Obed (by Ruth).
 * -	Jesse.
 * -	David.
 * -	Solomon (by Bathsheba). * - Nathan (by Bath-sheba) (Mary's line) (Zechariah 12:10-14)
 * -	Rehoboam.
 * -	Abijah.
 * -	Asa.
 * -	Jehoshaphat.
 * -	Jehoram.
 * -	Ahaziah.
 * -	Jehoash.
 * -	Amaziah.
 * -	Uzziah.
 * -	Jotham.
 * -	Ahaz.
 * -	Hezekiah.
 * -	Manasseh.
 * -	Amon.
 * -	Josiah.
 * -	Jeconiah.
 * -	Shealtiel.
 * -	Zerubbabel. * this from line the Dayan trace their lineage by means of oral tradition.
 * -	Meshulam.
 * -	Khaninah.
 * -	Berakhiyah.
 * -	Khasdayah.
 * -	Yeshayah. (Isaiah)
 * -	Ovadiah.
 * -	Shekhaniah.
 * -	Shemayahu.
 * -	Khizkiyah.
 * -	Yokhanan.
 * -	Shefat.(Sephat)
 * -	Khanan.
 * -	Natan Detzuzita.
 * -	Khokhna.
 * -	Kahana.
 * -	Rekhami.
 * -	Natan.
 * -	Kahana.
 * -	Khuna.
 * -	Merima.
 * -	Khanina.
 * -    Khuna.
 * -    Kufnai.
 * -    Bustenai.
 * -    Khasdai.
 * -    Zakkai.
 * -    Shlomo. (Solomon)
 * -    Nekhemiah. (Nehemiah)
 * -    Yitskhak. (Isaac)
 * -    Yehudah. (Judah)
 * -    David.
 * -    Yehudah. (Judah)
 * -    Zakkai.
 * -    Yoshiyahu.
 * -    Shlomo. (Solomon)
 * -    Yishai.
 * -    Khaim.
 * -    David.
 * -    Zekhariyah. (Zechariah)
 * -    Yosef.
 * -    Saadiah.
 * -    Moshe (Moses)
 * -    Shlomo.
 * -    Yehudah.
 * -    Ovadiah. (Obadiah)
 * -    Zedakiah.
 * -    Saadiah.
 * -    Moshe (Moses)
 * -    Ovadiah.(Obadiah)
 * -    Zedakiah.
 * -    Ovadiah. (Obadiah)
 * -    Moshe. (Moses)
 * -    Saadiah.
 * -    Moshe. (Moses)
 * -    Mordekhai.
 * -    Dayan. (which became the suriname)
 * -    Natan
 * -    Yosef. (Joseph)
 * -    Mordekhai.
 * -    Yosef. (Joseph)
 * -    Mordekhai.
 * -    Elazar Khaim.
 * -    Yeshaya.
 * -    Avraham (Abraham)
 * -    Moshe (Moses) --96.46.201.47 (talk) 04:52, 10 January 2011 (UTC)