Talk:Zenock

Untitled

It is also theorized by some that Zenock is the same as Enoch (EE-NOK) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.165.192 (talk) 05:59, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Is there a reliable sources for this? If not, it's just speculation that has no place here at Wikipedia. -- 208.81.184.4 (talk) 23:48, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Connection between Zenoch and the Teacher of Righteousness

I'm not going to go so far as to delete the entire paragraph without first trying to see if there is some reasoning to this connection. If Zenock was intended to be an Israelite rather than Nephite prophet, which he likely was, it's almost impossible for this to be the same figure as the Teacher of Righteousness, as the Nephites left in the First Temple period and the Qumran community didn't exist until the Second Temple period. All of the above is giving the Book of Mormon the benefit of the doubt, but without doing so, there is no way Joseph Smith could've known about the Teacher of Righteousness. There may be some reasoning to this connecting, so I won't edit it out, but personally I think it's a bit far fetched. GramCanMineAway (talk) 06:42, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@GramCamMineAway: I don't think the paragraph is proposing that Zenock is the same figure as the Teacher of Righteousness, but rather the same figure as Zadok from whom the Teacher is supposed to have descended. At least that's what I'm reading from the paragraph. It took me a few reads of the paragraph before I could parse what it was actually trying to say. The paragraph is poorly written - in my opinion it present the information in nearly the reverse order to what it should. It also does not properly attribute this suggestion to Hugh Nibley or whichever Latter-day Saint scholar has suggested this. The links in ref 8 appear to be no longer functional, so I haven't yet been able to check which parts of the paragraph can be attributed to the source and which are OR. --FyzixFighter (talk) 16:39, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

I think I have good news for you. It turns out the OpenLibrary/Internet Archive has a digitized copy of Old Testament and Related Studies, so you can see Nibley's content for yourself. See Nibley, Hugh (1986). "The Dead Sea Scrolls: Some Questions and Answers". In Welch, John W.; Gillum, Gary P.; Norton, Don E. (eds.). Old Testament and Related Studies. Collected Works of Hugh Nibley. Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book; Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies. p. 250. ISBN 0875790321. LCCN 85027544. OCLC 12908841. I fixed up the reference and cleaned up the paragraph a little to address what you said about how it read confusingly, but left it largely intact since y'all (Fyzix and GramCanMineAway) are apparently further discussing the content. I would give as my two cents that I am not sure the last sentence really belongs; since it's not clear if Nibley thinks Zadok is Zenock or just that Zenock resembles Zadok, I'm not sure how relevant later work that clarifies who the Zadokites were fits into the page.

I also expanded the page and added some sources to have content about Zenock's place in the Book of Mormon narrative, textual history, and reception (the latter is where I left the paragraph y'all are talking about). Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 10:01, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Hydrangeans: Very nice! I've got no reservation with you working on the paragraph - the discussion so far has been very preliminary and high level, so have it since you've got the source.

I do have a concern about the "Modern Mormon culture" section. Generally Masters dissertations and theses are considered reliable only if they can be shown to have had significant scholarly influence. I also think it's a bit of a stretch to extrapolate from the one authors comments about their own unfamiliarity to the broader Latter Day Saint community. I think it might be good to combine the Modern culture section with the Nibley, Nemelka and Melekin sections. Definitely kudos on finding a RS that discusses the latter two - I had previously excluded Nemelka on another page since I couldn't find strong enough sources to justify due weight. Let me try trimming and tweaking and see how it goes. --FyzixFighter (talk) 17:23, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the support. I've gone ahead and removed the last sentence about Zadokites.

Good point about the Modern culture section. I think you're right to rephrase it and attribute it as a hypothesis. I do think Mansfield's claim that there is just one Zenock in the book and the figure is not frequently mentioned in church-published material. I hope it is alright that I have added to the paragraph to that end. I also reordered the paragraph so the bit about Nibley and etymology is adjacent to the subsections; just seemed to flow a little better.

I like your rearrangement so that the subsections are all under the same header; that does seem to make sense. Your other reorganization edits look good as well. And I'm glad to hear the source about Nemelka is of help to you. JWHA Journal and Steven Shields's published research are great for verifiable, due content about Mormonisms beyond the main denominations. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 18:09, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

It's funny to me because I had the paragraph cited to Mansfield at the start of the subsection as well for the same reason, and only changed it at the last minute. I think either way works. Again, nice work! --FyzixFighter (talk) 18:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by BorgQueen (talk) 14:00, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the Book of Mormon name Zenock is misspelled? Source: "wrote inline the correct Zenoch, undoubtedly prompted by Joseph Smiths spelling out of the name, letter by letter. The name Zenoch parallels the spelling of the biblical name Enoch. But when he copied the text into P[rinter's manuscript], Oliver Cowdery replaced Zenoch with Zenock, and the current text has systematically ended up with the incorrect spelling." From Royal Skousen, "Some Textual Changes for a Scholarly Study of the Book of Mormon", BYU Studies Quarterly 51, no. 4 (2012): 115.
  • ALT1: ... that compared to the original manuscript, the Book of Mormon name Zenock is misspelled? Source: Identical to ALT0
  • ALT2: ... that Zenock, a prophet figure described in the Book of Mormon, is unfamiliar to many Mormons? Source: "The popularity of certain names in the Book of Mormon and the unpopularity of others might easily be explained by familiarity borne out of frequency. The first time I met Shule and his brother Zenock, I did not even recognize their names as Book of Mormon names immediately. I was raised in the LDS Church, am currently a member, and have read the Book of Mormon, yet it took me more than a few minutes to pinpoint where I had heard the names before. I certainly had not heard the names because anyone else I knew was named Shule or Zenock." From Jennifer R. Mansfield, " 'It's Wraylnn—with a W': Distinctive Mormon Naming Practices", MA thesis, Utah State University, 2012.
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Lords of the Earth
  • Comment: I noticed that when I run the DYK check, there's a result stating that the page has not been 5x expanded. However, the character count is 10,671. Before expansion began, the page was 2,112 characters long which means the 5x expansion threshold was crossed at 10,560 characters.

5x expanded by Hydrangeans (talk). Self-nominated at 16:50, 18 December 2022 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

• Cited:
• Interesting:
• Other problems: - weird wording.

QPQ: Done.

Overall: @Hydrangeans: Good article. However, the hook seems weirdly worded. With what it says, it makes it seem as if the name zenock is an alternate name for the book of mormon rather than the name of a nonbiblical prophet. So a hook rewording would be great. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:01, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@Onegreatjoke: Thanks for reviewing the nomination. I confess I'm struggling to see the confusion; the phrase "Book of Mormon name Zenock" is meant to parallel phrases like, say, "the biblical name Enoch", i.e. it's a name that comes from the Book of Mormon. But if it's confusing, then here are some attempted rephrasing:

• ALT3: ... that the name Zenock is misspelled in almost every published edition of the Book of Mormon?
• ALT4: ... that the nonbiblical prophet Zenock's name is misspelled in almost every published edition of the Book of Mormon?
• ALT5: ... that the Book of Mormon prophet Zenock's name was originally spelled Zenoch?
• ALT6: ... that in the Book of Mormon, the name of the prophet Zenock is misspelled?
• ALT7: ... that while transcribing the Book of Mormon, Oliver Cowdery misspelled the name Zenock?

What do you think? Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 18:12, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Those are fine so approve. Onegreatjoke (talk) 22:56, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Prep 4