Talk:Bahamut
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Mythology .
This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. |
|
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
 |
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Cryptozoology, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on cryptozoology and cryptids on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
Contents |
[edit] Disambig
Shouldn't this be remade as a proper disambig page? - Stoph 18:38, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Source?
Why doesn't anybody cite their damn work? Where in Islamic/Arabian/whatever literature is there mention of bahamut, or any aquatic version of behemoth for that matter? Give your damn sources!
[edit] Sources
I made a few sources hope it helps
Article is know sourced Kara Umi 19:36, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Never heard
well for me ...im muslim and i never heard anything named bahamut or so ever so i guess we need sorces thank you
What does Islam have to do with Arabian mythology? Arabian Mythology means Preislamic pagan mythologies that existed in ancient Arabian peninsula, saying it doesn't exist in Arabian mythology just because it doesn't exist in islam is like saying that Zues doesn't exist in Greek mythology because he isn't found in Eastern Orthodox church scripture. or that mars doesn't exist in ROman mythology because it isn't part of Roman catholicism. get real or get bent.
- I believe this article is hardly notable to be mentioned. There's hardly any source and the previous references were made to some websites that are hardly verifiable. It's hard to say, but the article may have to be deleted, or at the least, a redirect. — Blue。 21:36, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- The subject does exist, and it did influence popular culture. I think it should be merged, not redirected. Kariteh 21:57, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Merging
- Support: Minimal sources, content mostly video game trivia. Should be mentioned in some lines over there in Behemoth. — Blue。 22:05, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
- Against merge: Bahamut is traditionally the "King of Dragons" though this may be contrived by the Squaresoft and TSR corporations as a mythical creature, thereby reducing the amount of credible sources. However, the lack of sources is just that, lack of sources, not an invitation to merge. First of all, by all accounts I have read they are NOT the same thing. Behemoth did come up in Historiography classes, in the same breath as the other mythical creature, the Leviathan. These two were respectively compared to the giant animals of the earth and sea, the elephant and the whale. Effectively, what you are talking about doing is merging a giant dragon with the beast in control of the earth, for no other reason than "they sound the same." This is upsurd. -bulmabriefs144 24:22, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- Even in the link itself, they say as to Bahamut that it's a sea creature while Behemoth "eateth grass like an ox." You can revert if you wish, but I see no reason why this is an issue. Different creatures, different concepts, no merge needed. -bulmabriefs144 24:26, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
oppose merge unless a source can be provided that says this is somehow connected to a "Behemoth" we should obviously not merge just because they have similar spellings. --JayHenry 05:24, 17 August 2007 (UTC)- Actually, I spoke to soon. I see now that the source in this article does say that the Whos-Who of Mythology claims that the words have similar origin. It looks as if Bahamut should be merged with the Dungeons and Dragons monster, and Behemoth should perhaps merely contain a sentence saying "the Arabic Bahamut may be related" or something to that effect. --JayHenry 05:35, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
-
- What you are asking, if I understand this correctly, is to merge two beasts that may or may not have any connection to each other strictly based on pronunciation. Both beasts are historically documented as actual beasts in completely separate religious books. The book of Job states that the Behemoth was a living breathing creature that roamed the earth at that time and could be observed as a reference point for God to note to Job. Merging these two will do nothing except bring confusion to the reader. Did the Behemoth and the Leviathan get together and birth the Bahamut? Unless you have some sort of historical proof of this interaction, these beasts have not business whatsoever being mentioned in the same reference, with exception to that they may have similar origins due to vocabulary. —Preceding Rachel Meglio comment added by 65.25.86.221 (talk) 20:18, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] De-"Trivia"lized
I've taken the liberty, (at the mild arm-twisting of SuggestBot,) of restructuring what has become a WP:Trivia section into something resemlbling prose. I deliberately left out most of the marginal mentions, and I would encourage editors not to add them back unless there is more to be written about them than there was. I'd like some feedback if at all possible from those watching. -- RoninBK T C 13:39, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
