This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Enoch article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Who was Enoch's mother. Where did the people of Nod come from? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.12.116.138 ( talk) 12:27, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
It helps if you know or read the bible. Genesis 5:4 And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters SO yeah, Adam was alive for 900 odd year so he had PLENTY of daughters. Only key children are mentions in the bible. -astenb
People have placed this article in category:Jewish history. Are we suppose to believe that someone who lived 365 years and was taken by God to the sky was a historical character? -- JLCA 12:43, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
How is it that the biblical text concerning Enoch walking with God that is quoted is not referenced? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.124.54.50 ( talk) 21:21, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I would like to point out that the last line in the first paragraph, "However, Hebrews 11:13 claims that Enoch (along with Abel, Noah, and Abraham) died." seems to be in error. Hebrews 11:5 makes it clear that Enoch did not die, but was "translated" (KJV) a term which is rendered "taken up," "carried away," or "transposed," in other translations. "By faith Enoch was taken away without experiencing death. He could not be found, because God had taken him away. For before he was taken, he won approval as one who pleased God." Heb 11:5 ISV. DaveBoyd 2:44PMCDT 03122012.
I find it interesting that the article does not so much as nod towards Dr. John Dee and Edward Kelley, not to mention masonic lore. -- Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. 12:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
The article states that the book has "been rejected by the church". Shouldn't that be A church? And it would be nice to know which one(s) reject it.
and other stuff
The Enoch son of Cain (Genesis 4:17) is not grandson of Adam. As Cain is not mentioned in the generations of Adam (Genesis 5:1-18) in the original text nor in any of the translations. This coincides with ancient documentation that Cain was never seed of Adam, pointing to a deeper and sinister origin of Cain in the Garden of Eden. The fruit that Lucifer tempted Eve to partake of in the Garden was not a fruit but carnal knowledge. Trees (Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil) have been always a reference of "people" in the bible (as "Descendants" are also referred as "Seed").
This is a very interesting passage, and personally I think it may be important to clarify it. "The Enoch son of Cain is not grandson of Adam."... What? Were Cain and Abel not sons of Adam? I'm not really disputing it, I'm no bible scholar... "As Cain is not mentioned in the generations of Adam" -- ahh, now we are getting clearer. Does that indeed necessarily negate the possibility that he is Adam's son? Sorry to shake the tree here. "nor in any of the translations" .. wait... what?? ANY of the translations? According to who exactly? How many translations are there? Original Research? WP:NOR "The fruit that Lucifer tempted Eve to partake of in the Garden was not a fruit but carnal knowledge." ... Again, according to who? The Bible in front of me (heavily translated as it may be) merely claims that the apple was an apple, no more, no less. Perhaps something in the way the original text is rendered shows that it is more than a mere apple but I don't think it's our job to deduce, speculate or assume this. Besides, if it were our job to do so, we would be researching or calculating the will of God - and not by inspired works, but by human effort. One could argue that the nature of the fruit is irrelevant and all that matters is their sin in disobeyed God's instruction to not eat it. In any event, I'm sure that this is discussed in the article where it is actually even relevant at all. "Trees (Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil) have been always a reference of people in the bible" -- with all due respect, how do you know, and what does said tree exactly have to do with Enoch at this point?
So we have: - a discussion of Cain's origin, which is of questionable relevance - a discussion of botany, which is of questionable relevance - a question of metaphor, also hard to see how it relates to Enoch - no citations - possibly a lot of speculation
I don't really mean to point the finger and accuse ;-) .. If I thought that I could do better, I would. I was just passing through.
I think that a big first step would be to check all the "External Links" for relevance and try to use them as citations where appropriate. Then citations should be added to any other wanting parts of the article as this would help clarify it. Following that an editor (me!? oh no) could verify the relevance of each portion of the article.
It's a wonderful article, I'm very pleased to see it represented and learned a lot from it.. Thanks for your attention, I hope I haven't overly restated the obvious, stepped on anyone's toes, offended anyone etc. 125.236.211.165 ( talk) 07:48, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
EDIT: If an external link is a reference, then it should be indicated as a reference and not as an external link 125.236.211.165 ( talk) 08:21, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
I think there needs to be some explanation how Enoch could exist in Hindu traditions. I'm not familiar with any details of Hinduism, but I never learned of it utilizing any Judeo-Christian traditions. Did some parts of Jewish scripture get absorbed into the Hindu scriptures? If so, when and how? 69.95.232.2 ( talk) 02:19, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
This article should improve the section which talks about figures who were thought to be related to Enoch. In particular :
For Enoch-Metatron the relation is simple and it is already pointed out about 3 Enoch (to rewrite article 3 Enoch is in may to-do, but not a priority). About Enoch/Fu-Xi I dont know. I know only that according to many apocriphal litterature Enoch (as Fu-Xi) was the inventor of writing. A ntv ( talk) 19:05, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Figurists are Jesuits priest during the 17th and 18th century and it was a huge Chinese Rites controversy that influence Catholic compatibility with local beliefs in China among the Catholics. The Jesuit Priest upheld these beliefs that was successful in penetrating China and serving at the Imperial court from 1689 until there was a decree by Clement XI and Benedict XIV to regard Confucious and local customs as superstitious and not social. This was reversed by Pope Pius XII. It affected the spread of Catholism in China from 1721 to 1939. All Figurists agreed upon the belief that a certain period in the Chinese history does not belong to the Chinese only but to all of mankind. The Jesuits furthermore believed that Chinese history dated back before the Flood and was therefore as old as European history. This made the Figurists believe that the two histories were equal in religious importance. According to the Figurists at the time, Noah's son Shem would have been to the Far East and would have brought with him the knowledge of Adam. Among their beliefs is the link between Enoch and Fu Xi. These are significant and historical decisions that changed a country's historical interaction with Rome. Joachim Bouvet publish some of the text with his conclusion that Chinese had known the whole truth of the Christian tradition in ancient times and that this truth could be found in the Chinese classics. User:Topsaint User talk:Topsaint 18:19, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
References to Enoch-Fu Xi linkages are
The link of Islamic view of Enoch leads to an irrelevant page?--
Zakkour (
talk)
14:20, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
There ought to be an article on the Pillars of Enoch, which could borrow from this site. [1] ADM ( talk) 17:39, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Some ancient treatises of Judeo-Christian morality appear to have a strong Enochian element, for example in the opposition to abortion and contraception. It would be interesting to try and examine the influence of Enochian teachings in the moral aspect of Abrahamic religion. ADM ( talk) 01:44, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Surely as son of Cain, the first Enoch was the grandson, not great grandson of Adam? I've amended the opening paragraph accordingly. If I've overlooked something here, please explain here and change it back. Rojomoke ( talk) 10:19, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Wrong Enoch according to mainsteam interpretaion. 70.74.191.229 ( talk) 07:36, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Please consider renaming this article Enoch, son of Jared as per Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Bible#standardized_way_of_naming_articles_for_biblical_persons. Lemmiwinks2 ( talk) 20:47, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
The icon does not represent enoch and elijah. It is st. Anthony and st. Paul the hermit. Please change that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.10.182.138 ( talk) 21:53, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
There are different trusted sources those accept Prophet Idris was Hermes Trismegistus and as well as, suspects there shows he is Enoch? What is correct and according to what certainly? Wikipedia seems confusing in fact, Idris = Enoch (?). Davion 20:58, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
It's not Wikipedia's fault; the subject is open to interpretation. What is generally considered facts: 1) Thoth was an Egyptian God; and scribe for the other gods 2) Hermes was a Greek God; and messenger for the other gods 3) Mercury was a Roman God; and messenger for the other gods 4) Hermes-Trismegistus became a fusion god in the Roman era combining the three gods (Hermes, Thoth, Mercury) into a new messenger god 5) Enoch was a Jewish Patriarch in the Tanakh 6) According to Jewish medieval apocrypha Enoch is Archangel Metatron, the voice of God 7) Idris was a pre-Islamic Prophet according to the Quran; his name means Interpreter Therefore Thoth could be Hermes, who could be Mercury, and they all could be Hermes Trismegistus, and perhaps also Enoch and/or Metatron, and Idris too. However, if you want to know what is correct and certain, you'll need to ask God who his voice/interpreter/scribe/messenger is. 70.74.191.229 ( talk) 07:32, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
I suggest removing the bolded text in the quote below:
The relevant portion of Hebrews 11:13 reads (in the NIV): "All these people were still living by faith when they died." Without a citation showing that scholars believe the passage is referring to Enoch's death, this probably should be deleted as original research. I would imagine commentators see Enoch as an exception to verse 13 since according to verse 5 he didn't see death; at least that is the view in Gill's, Matthew Henry's and other commentaries I've seen. The12thMan ( talk) 20:30, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
At the beginning of the article it says that you spell 'Enoch' חֲנוֹךְ, in biblical hebrew and in modern/tiberian hebrew you pronounce it 'Hankok'. Surely it would be 'Kanok' as ח is the letter 'khet' as opposed to the similar looking letter 'Heh' (ה in hebrew). Is this oddity due to someone misreading the hebrew mistaking ח for ה so Kanok became Hanok or have I made the mistake? -- Grammarbishop8 ( talk) 13:28, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
I find it offensive that Enoch is referred to as a "Character" and not a man. It's insinuating he's a myth or cartoon. How can we change it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.205.139.190 ( talk) 01:58, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
1. Enoch-Genesis 5:24 Hebrews 11:5
2. Elijah-taken up to heaven. 2 Kings2:1-15
3. little girl-she's not dead, only sleeping, raised by Jesus Mark 5:39-42
4. Lazarus-raised from the dead John 11:1-44
5. Jesus Christ-resurrection-arising from the dead John 5:28,29 John 6:39, 40, 44-ascension
There is suppose to be a whole generation that will not see Death...Matt24:34
the theme(the testimony) is to Please God....walk in the Spirit...if you walk in the flesh you cannot Please God... Romans 8:8 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.3.164.240 ( talk • contribs)
The section on medieval Christianity ends in the Middle of a sentence without actually giving any information. What's going on here?-- Ermenrich ( talk) 14:03, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
References
This section seems to be entirely about the Book of Enoch. Wouldn't it belong better in that article? Mannanan51 ( talk) 06:44, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: ( non-admin closure) MOVED User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 18:57, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
There is consensus that the titular author of the Book of Enoch is the primary topic. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 18:57, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
– He is the primary topic and has long term significance. Enoch (son of Cain) is a minor person in the Bible. See pageviews https://pageviews.toolforge.org/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&redirects=0&start=2015-07-01&end=2021-09-07&pages=Enoch%7CEnoch_(ancestor_of_Noah)%7CEnoch_(son_of_Cain)%7CEnoch_(given_name)%7CEnoch_(Agents_of_S.H.I.E.L.D.)%7CEnoch_(disambiguation)%7CEnoch_(surname) Sahaib3005 ( talk) 16:31, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
It would make things much simpler. Bradyb0412 ( talk) 03:06, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Enoch article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Who was Enoch's mother. Where did the people of Nod come from? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.12.116.138 ( talk) 12:27, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
It helps if you know or read the bible. Genesis 5:4 And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters SO yeah, Adam was alive for 900 odd year so he had PLENTY of daughters. Only key children are mentions in the bible. -astenb
People have placed this article in category:Jewish history. Are we suppose to believe that someone who lived 365 years and was taken by God to the sky was a historical character? -- JLCA 12:43, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
How is it that the biblical text concerning Enoch walking with God that is quoted is not referenced? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.124.54.50 ( talk) 21:21, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I would like to point out that the last line in the first paragraph, "However, Hebrews 11:13 claims that Enoch (along with Abel, Noah, and Abraham) died." seems to be in error. Hebrews 11:5 makes it clear that Enoch did not die, but was "translated" (KJV) a term which is rendered "taken up," "carried away," or "transposed," in other translations. "By faith Enoch was taken away without experiencing death. He could not be found, because God had taken him away. For before he was taken, he won approval as one who pleased God." Heb 11:5 ISV. DaveBoyd 2:44PMCDT 03122012.
I find it interesting that the article does not so much as nod towards Dr. John Dee and Edward Kelley, not to mention masonic lore. -- Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. 12:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
The article states that the book has "been rejected by the church". Shouldn't that be A church? And it would be nice to know which one(s) reject it.
and other stuff
The Enoch son of Cain (Genesis 4:17) is not grandson of Adam. As Cain is not mentioned in the generations of Adam (Genesis 5:1-18) in the original text nor in any of the translations. This coincides with ancient documentation that Cain was never seed of Adam, pointing to a deeper and sinister origin of Cain in the Garden of Eden. The fruit that Lucifer tempted Eve to partake of in the Garden was not a fruit but carnal knowledge. Trees (Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil) have been always a reference of "people" in the bible (as "Descendants" are also referred as "Seed").
This is a very interesting passage, and personally I think it may be important to clarify it. "The Enoch son of Cain is not grandson of Adam."... What? Were Cain and Abel not sons of Adam? I'm not really disputing it, I'm no bible scholar... "As Cain is not mentioned in the generations of Adam" -- ahh, now we are getting clearer. Does that indeed necessarily negate the possibility that he is Adam's son? Sorry to shake the tree here. "nor in any of the translations" .. wait... what?? ANY of the translations? According to who exactly? How many translations are there? Original Research? WP:NOR "The fruit that Lucifer tempted Eve to partake of in the Garden was not a fruit but carnal knowledge." ... Again, according to who? The Bible in front of me (heavily translated as it may be) merely claims that the apple was an apple, no more, no less. Perhaps something in the way the original text is rendered shows that it is more than a mere apple but I don't think it's our job to deduce, speculate or assume this. Besides, if it were our job to do so, we would be researching or calculating the will of God - and not by inspired works, but by human effort. One could argue that the nature of the fruit is irrelevant and all that matters is their sin in disobeyed God's instruction to not eat it. In any event, I'm sure that this is discussed in the article where it is actually even relevant at all. "Trees (Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil) have been always a reference of people in the bible" -- with all due respect, how do you know, and what does said tree exactly have to do with Enoch at this point?
So we have: - a discussion of Cain's origin, which is of questionable relevance - a discussion of botany, which is of questionable relevance - a question of metaphor, also hard to see how it relates to Enoch - no citations - possibly a lot of speculation
I don't really mean to point the finger and accuse ;-) .. If I thought that I could do better, I would. I was just passing through.
I think that a big first step would be to check all the "External Links" for relevance and try to use them as citations where appropriate. Then citations should be added to any other wanting parts of the article as this would help clarify it. Following that an editor (me!? oh no) could verify the relevance of each portion of the article.
It's a wonderful article, I'm very pleased to see it represented and learned a lot from it.. Thanks for your attention, I hope I haven't overly restated the obvious, stepped on anyone's toes, offended anyone etc. 125.236.211.165 ( talk) 07:48, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
EDIT: If an external link is a reference, then it should be indicated as a reference and not as an external link 125.236.211.165 ( talk) 08:21, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
I think there needs to be some explanation how Enoch could exist in Hindu traditions. I'm not familiar with any details of Hinduism, but I never learned of it utilizing any Judeo-Christian traditions. Did some parts of Jewish scripture get absorbed into the Hindu scriptures? If so, when and how? 69.95.232.2 ( talk) 02:19, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
This article should improve the section which talks about figures who were thought to be related to Enoch. In particular :
For Enoch-Metatron the relation is simple and it is already pointed out about 3 Enoch (to rewrite article 3 Enoch is in may to-do, but not a priority). About Enoch/Fu-Xi I dont know. I know only that according to many apocriphal litterature Enoch (as Fu-Xi) was the inventor of writing. A ntv ( talk) 19:05, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
Figurists are Jesuits priest during the 17th and 18th century and it was a huge Chinese Rites controversy that influence Catholic compatibility with local beliefs in China among the Catholics. The Jesuit Priest upheld these beliefs that was successful in penetrating China and serving at the Imperial court from 1689 until there was a decree by Clement XI and Benedict XIV to regard Confucious and local customs as superstitious and not social. This was reversed by Pope Pius XII. It affected the spread of Catholism in China from 1721 to 1939. All Figurists agreed upon the belief that a certain period in the Chinese history does not belong to the Chinese only but to all of mankind. The Jesuits furthermore believed that Chinese history dated back before the Flood and was therefore as old as European history. This made the Figurists believe that the two histories were equal in religious importance. According to the Figurists at the time, Noah's son Shem would have been to the Far East and would have brought with him the knowledge of Adam. Among their beliefs is the link between Enoch and Fu Xi. These are significant and historical decisions that changed a country's historical interaction with Rome. Joachim Bouvet publish some of the text with his conclusion that Chinese had known the whole truth of the Christian tradition in ancient times and that this truth could be found in the Chinese classics. User:Topsaint User talk:Topsaint 18:19, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
References to Enoch-Fu Xi linkages are
The link of Islamic view of Enoch leads to an irrelevant page?--
Zakkour (
talk)
14:20, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
There ought to be an article on the Pillars of Enoch, which could borrow from this site. [1] ADM ( talk) 17:39, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Some ancient treatises of Judeo-Christian morality appear to have a strong Enochian element, for example in the opposition to abortion and contraception. It would be interesting to try and examine the influence of Enochian teachings in the moral aspect of Abrahamic religion. ADM ( talk) 01:44, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Surely as son of Cain, the first Enoch was the grandson, not great grandson of Adam? I've amended the opening paragraph accordingly. If I've overlooked something here, please explain here and change it back. Rojomoke ( talk) 10:19, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Wrong Enoch according to mainsteam interpretaion. 70.74.191.229 ( talk) 07:36, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Please consider renaming this article Enoch, son of Jared as per Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Bible#standardized_way_of_naming_articles_for_biblical_persons. Lemmiwinks2 ( talk) 20:47, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
The icon does not represent enoch and elijah. It is st. Anthony and st. Paul the hermit. Please change that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.10.182.138 ( talk) 21:53, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
There are different trusted sources those accept Prophet Idris was Hermes Trismegistus and as well as, suspects there shows he is Enoch? What is correct and according to what certainly? Wikipedia seems confusing in fact, Idris = Enoch (?). Davion 20:58, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
It's not Wikipedia's fault; the subject is open to interpretation. What is generally considered facts: 1) Thoth was an Egyptian God; and scribe for the other gods 2) Hermes was a Greek God; and messenger for the other gods 3) Mercury was a Roman God; and messenger for the other gods 4) Hermes-Trismegistus became a fusion god in the Roman era combining the three gods (Hermes, Thoth, Mercury) into a new messenger god 5) Enoch was a Jewish Patriarch in the Tanakh 6) According to Jewish medieval apocrypha Enoch is Archangel Metatron, the voice of God 7) Idris was a pre-Islamic Prophet according to the Quran; his name means Interpreter Therefore Thoth could be Hermes, who could be Mercury, and they all could be Hermes Trismegistus, and perhaps also Enoch and/or Metatron, and Idris too. However, if you want to know what is correct and certain, you'll need to ask God who his voice/interpreter/scribe/messenger is. 70.74.191.229 ( talk) 07:32, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
I suggest removing the bolded text in the quote below:
The relevant portion of Hebrews 11:13 reads (in the NIV): "All these people were still living by faith when they died." Without a citation showing that scholars believe the passage is referring to Enoch's death, this probably should be deleted as original research. I would imagine commentators see Enoch as an exception to verse 13 since according to verse 5 he didn't see death; at least that is the view in Gill's, Matthew Henry's and other commentaries I've seen. The12thMan ( talk) 20:30, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
At the beginning of the article it says that you spell 'Enoch' חֲנוֹךְ, in biblical hebrew and in modern/tiberian hebrew you pronounce it 'Hankok'. Surely it would be 'Kanok' as ח is the letter 'khet' as opposed to the similar looking letter 'Heh' (ה in hebrew). Is this oddity due to someone misreading the hebrew mistaking ח for ה so Kanok became Hanok or have I made the mistake? -- Grammarbishop8 ( talk) 13:28, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
I find it offensive that Enoch is referred to as a "Character" and not a man. It's insinuating he's a myth or cartoon. How can we change it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.205.139.190 ( talk) 01:58, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
1. Enoch-Genesis 5:24 Hebrews 11:5
2. Elijah-taken up to heaven. 2 Kings2:1-15
3. little girl-she's not dead, only sleeping, raised by Jesus Mark 5:39-42
4. Lazarus-raised from the dead John 11:1-44
5. Jesus Christ-resurrection-arising from the dead John 5:28,29 John 6:39, 40, 44-ascension
There is suppose to be a whole generation that will not see Death...Matt24:34
the theme(the testimony) is to Please God....walk in the Spirit...if you walk in the flesh you cannot Please God... Romans 8:8 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.3.164.240 ( talk • contribs)
The section on medieval Christianity ends in the Middle of a sentence without actually giving any information. What's going on here?-- Ermenrich ( talk) 14:03, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
References
This section seems to be entirely about the Book of Enoch. Wouldn't it belong better in that article? Mannanan51 ( talk) 06:44, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: ( non-admin closure) MOVED User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 18:57, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
There is consensus that the titular author of the Book of Enoch is the primary topic. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 18:57, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
– He is the primary topic and has long term significance. Enoch (son of Cain) is a minor person in the Bible. See pageviews https://pageviews.toolforge.org/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&redirects=0&start=2015-07-01&end=2021-09-07&pages=Enoch%7CEnoch_(ancestor_of_Noah)%7CEnoch_(son_of_Cain)%7CEnoch_(given_name)%7CEnoch_(Agents_of_S.H.I.E.L.D.)%7CEnoch_(disambiguation)%7CEnoch_(surname) Sahaib3005 ( talk) 16:31, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
It would make things much simpler. Bradyb0412 ( talk) 03:06, 10 June 2024 (UTC)