Talk:List of burial places of Abrahamic figures

Biblical or modern place names?
While there may be some rationale behind using Bible-age place names, it is applied inconsistently: Israel and Jordan are called by their modern names, the West Bank is consistently referred to as "Judea" and "Samaria". Either we use historical toponyms or modern ones, the current haphazard mix is both confusing and misleading. MeteorMaker (talk) 10:26, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

One week later: I up the ante by suggesting we modernize the terminology on this page to conform with other online encyclopedias. MeteorMaker (talk) 22:58, 8 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Not to get into a huge debate with you, but you suggest that "Judea" and "Samaria" are biblical names and not modern ones, and that is a matter of opinion. In Israel today, most Jews refer to these places by the names "Judea" and "Samaria", so in a sense, these names are modern to some, but "biblical" to others. I do agree with you though that consistency is important.David Betesh (talk)


 * Good point, however only relevant for he.wikipedia. English Wikipedia should reflect English usage, and it appears that in English, "Judea" and "Samaria" are only used as historical toponyms. We have searched extensively for evidence of non-historical usage of the terms outside Israel, and come up with nothing except some scattered anecdotal evidence after several months of work. I think it's safe to say that this article presently does not conform with neither WP:NCGN, WP:UNDUE or WP:NPOV.  MeteorMaker (talk) 15:13, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You mean you  have been attempting to remove these references from English WP. Not going to fly, certainly not on articles discussing biblical figures. NoCal100 (talk) 16:37, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * If they aren't consistent with policy, they should indeed be removed and replaced with more neutral equivalents. After two months of debating the issue, nobody has been able to presente a reliable source to disprove the massive evidence that the terms are Israel-specific and thus not compliant with WP:NCGN, WP:UNDUE or WP:NPOV. Since you've been away from the discussion for some days, here's an update. MeteorMaker (talk) 16:44, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * don't extend this reversal of the onus of proof to this article as well. enough is enough. NoCal100 (talk) 16:52, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * There's nothing about "reversal of the onus of proof " in any WP policy, it seems to be a recent buzzword that is routinely applied by certain editors when they find themselves unable to come up with reliable sources in support for their positions. There is abundant evidence for the position that "Samaria" and "Judea" are not modern toponyms outside Israel, and none at all that it is. Take a good look at WP:V and tell me where it says it makes an exception for this article. MeteorMaker (talk) 17:08, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * If you want to claim that '"Samaria" and "Judea" are not modern toponyms outside Israel'- you need to find sources that say just that . You have spectacularly failed to do this, despite your campaign that has been going n for several months now. Enough. NoCal100 (talk) 17:11, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Didn't click the link, did you? MeteorMaker (talk) 17:15, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I did. I saw a lot of hand waving and original research, but not even one source that actually says '"Samaria" and "Judea" are not modern toponyms outside Israel'- hop to it. NoCal100 (talk) 17:27, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You must have read another page then, the one I linked to is just a collection of all the sources that have been presented in the two-month long discussion and that state anything about the modern usage of the toponym and can't, by definition, be OR since it's just a compilation of cites. Here are just a few for you:
 * "Samaria: Central region, ancient Palestine. [...] It corresponds roughly to the northern portion of the modern West Bank territory." "The [West Bank] is also known within Israel by its biblical names, Judaea and Samaria."Britannica Concise Encyclopedia
 * "For political purposes, and despite the geographical imprecision involved, the annexationalist camp in Israel prefers to refer to the area [...] not as the West Bank, but as Judea and Samaria." Ian S Lustick: For the Land and the Lord
 * "Judea and Samaria, what most of the world refers to as the West Bank." Robert Zelnick, "Israel's Unilaterialism: Beyond Gaza"
 * "Israelis often refer to the northern West Bank region by its biblical name of Samaria." "Extra!: West Bank" CNN Library/CNN Student News
 * "The area that the Bible and many Israelis now refer to as Judea and Samaria, and the rest of the world calls the West Bank." Benny Morris, Palestinians on the Right Side of History
 * Samaria: "This historic term [...] is used by the Israeli government, Zionists and Israelis, to refer to the modern region, but it is no longer used by others." Zionism and Israel - Encyclopedic Dictionary (The Zionism and Israel Center)
 * There are dozens more. Now let's see your sources. MeteorMaker (talk) 18:07, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

English Please
the article could use some citations in English. I am sure that the citations given are reliable but I for one would like to know where to look for more info. I was going to tag this with but the template has been deleted.J8079s (talk) 06:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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 move request was: moved. Rifleman 82 (talk) 23:21, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

List of burial places of Biblical figures → List of burial places of biblical figures — Per Manual of Style (capital letters): "The adjective biblical should not be capitalized." (Could not move due to existing redirects.) Jeffro 77  (talk) 02:33, 14 November 2010 (UTC)


 * George Bush (Biblical scholar) → George Bush (biblical scholar)
 * Gibborim (Biblical) → Gibborim (biblical)
 * List of Biblical commentaries → List of biblical commentaries
 * History of music in the Biblical period → History of music in the biblical period


 * "Biblical" is an adjective, but "Biblical period" would appear to be a proper noun. There are many other examples of adjectives that are used to form proper nouns: Napoleonic Era, Civil War, Space Age, Atomic Age, Machine Age, and Industrial Revolution. My understanding is that when the word "Biblical" relates to the Bible, it's capitalized. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 03:46, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * There may be precedent for leaving it capitalised (in the specific usage of "Biblical Period", not for the others) if it is specifically referring to a period formally known as "the Biblical Period", however this seems extraordinarily unlikely (unlike the articles cited as examples, there is no Biblical Period), as opposed to an arbitrary period to which events in the Bible are traditionally attributed. Your personal opinion about using the capitalised "Biblical" in reference to the Bible is not consistent with Wikipedia's manual of style, which explicitly directs that "biblical" in the context of the Bible is not capitalised.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 03:59, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Move them all. There is no recognised "Biblical Period" since it covers most of recorded history. Good work, Jeffro. StAnselm (talk) 04:30, 14 November 2010 (UTC)


 * As I first mentioned, "biblical" is an adjective, but only when used alone, as the MOS implies. But in combination it creates a proper noun. Exactly how that proper noun would be defined is another issue, but might be similar to defining "Industrial Age" for instance. I don't think the MOS really covers this situation clearly, and finding common usage in other sources might be a good idea. I've seen it used both ways, for example The Bible as History by Werner Keller (1995) uses the capitalized word throughout, even when it's just purely an adjective. So the question for one of the names above is whether "Biblical period" is a specific period that is defined by the Bible. If so, it's safer to keep it a proper noun since it's naming a specific period.   --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 04:55, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * How the word might be variously presented in other works is not directly relevant, and is the reason why Wikipedia has its own style guide. Combining an adjective with a noun other than a proper noun does not automatically make that combination a proper noun even if the adjective is derived from a noun that is itself a proper noun. There is no formally defined 'Biblical period' (if there were, it would be the 'Biblical Period'), and the Bible does not define any such period. That is, the 'biblical period' is subjectively determined by those who study the Bible with respect to history, not by the Bible itself which is a collection of books that were collated many years after they were written, to the exclusion of many other writings also considered.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 05:18, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Stating that ""biblical" is an adjective, but only when used alone" is a false assertion because adjectives are never used on their own. They always&mdash;directly or implicitly&mdash;describe a noun.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 05:22, 14 November 2010 (UTC)


 * No argument from me on any of your points. But your statement, "There is no formally defined 'Biblical period," may become a POV issue. Note how the term "biblical period" is used in books. It seems to be more than a matter of writing "style." Another factor is whether it's another term for "Bible period," which another book search shows commonly used. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 06:16, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Looking through the first five pages of your Google search results for "biblical period", most have both words in lower case. The only results showing both words capitalised (as would be expected if the pair of words function as a proper noun) are where the terms are in Title Case, indicating that there is no formal term 'Biblical Period'. Wikipedia articles should therefore defer to usage as indicated in the Manual of Style, as previously indicated.-- Jeffro 77 (talk) 06:24, 14 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Move all, not even a mention of the possibility of "Biblical" in the first two dictionaries I looked at, so the MOS would appear to have it right. --Kotniski (talk) 16:22, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. 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.

New testament
I propose we add a list of tombs for new testament figures: There is no existing article to bring these together, so would logically fit here. Oncenawhile (talk) 22:21, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Tomb of Jesus
 * John the Baptist in the Umayyad Mosque
 * Tomb of the Virgin Mary
 * Saint Peter's tomb
 * Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls
 * Saint Mark's Coptic Orthodox Cathedral (Alexandria)
 * Saint Matthew in the Salerno Cathedral
 * Saint Luke in Thebes, Greece
 * Basilica of St. John

I would suggest renaming it to abrahamic religions and including other islamic prophets: Muhammad, Ishmael, Saleh,,, (PBUH) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.5.96.248 (talk) 01:59, 20 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi. Why didn't you go ahead with it? Either the name is changed ("from the Hebrew Bible"), or it HAS to include NT characters. ArmindenArminden (talk) 07:54, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Eber
Does anyone know where Patriarch Eber is buried? Prsaucer1958 (talk) 19:01, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on List of burial places of biblical figures. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070312202752/http://www.tevuot.org/aretz/3k.html to http://www.tevuot.org/aretz/3k.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080330031918/http://www.syt.co.il/showKever.asp?id=299 to http://www.syt.co.il/showKever.asp?id=299
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120211085524/http://www.tombofnahum.com/index.htm to http://www.tombofnahum.com/index.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111001191329/http://www.mytzadik.com/tadik.asp?kever_id=58&safaid=6 to http://www.mytzadik.com/tadik.asp?kever_id=58&safaid=6

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:21, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Abrahamic figures
Shouldn't this be renamed to "List of burial places of Abrahamic figures" or something else? Seeing as these people are not only exclusive to Christianity, but also in Judaism and Islam.

Zephaniah's Tomb
This picture claims to be of Zephaniah's tomb Zephaniah's Tomb I don't know, worth looking into. How can no photos of his tomb exist? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RossVanDerH (talk • contribs) 00:50, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Book of Mormon figures
The burial of the characters from the Book of Mormon & Pearls of Great Price should be incorporated into this list.Doremon764 (talk) 16:35, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Changing page title
Similarities to Table of messagers of Abrahamic religions, Angels in Abrahamic religions, and People of the Book all under the Abrahamic Religions.Doremon764 (talk) 05:16, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Merging Pages
We should Merge the List of burial places of Islamic figures into this page. 12.245.73.6 (talk) 21:21, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

"List of burial places of Islamic figures" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect List of burial places of Islamic figures. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 8 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 02:50, 8 October 2021 (UTC)