Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.
// request.cf · coarse context
A page that knows where it met you.
Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 30 days
Lilith was a Philosophy and religion good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article is supported by WikiProject Mythology. This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.MythologyWikipedia:WikiProject MythologyTemplate:WikiProject MythologyMythology
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
This article is within the scope of the Women in Religion WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of women in religion. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Women in ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject Women in ReligionTemplate:WikiProject Women in ReligionWomen in Religion
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kabbalah, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Kabbalah on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.KabbalahWikipedia:WikiProject KabbalahTemplate:WikiProject KabbalahKabbalah
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occult, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to the occult on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OccultWikipedia:WikiProject OccultTemplate:WikiProject OccultOccult
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ancient Near East–related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East
Assess: -Consider rewording article to adhere more to standards of Neutral Point of View and Verifiability. Many sentences read as though "Lilith" existed and previous cultures have aspects that relate back to "her" rather than that the concept of Lilith arose during the middle ages and may have been inspired by previous cultures. There are multiple places in this article and related articles that also mention Lilith and present "facts" which are then immediately contradicted by sentences after. The whole article is mildly schizophrenic, stating facts then contradicting them.
Cleanup: -Shorten and remove least notable uses of Lilith in popular culture section.
Copyedit: -Patai and Hurwitz have two sources and it's confused which source is being called upon in the notes. For example, no note should read Hurwitz p. xx but instead read Hurwitz (1980) p.xx or Huritz (1992) p.xx
-There are missing page numbers from many sources.
-This article is using the NOTES - REFERENCES style of annotation so the <ref name="NAME"/> inline notations for sources with multiple pages listed in the Reference section is not used and need to be edited to a <ref>Author (DATE) p. xx</ref> style.
-Check on capitalization and individualism throughout. If it is a common demon lilitu then it's lower case if it's the Lilith it's upper case. In each usage what are we talking about? Is it THE Ki-sikil-lil-la-ke? Is it Lilu or lilu? Is it ever Lilitu or should it alwasy be lilitu? Is it Ardat-lil or is there ardat-lil's? There is consistency in Hurwitz's book but not across sources.
Latest comment: 5 days ago2 comments1 person in discussion
There is a major problem with the incantation bowl image used in this article. According to the source describing this bowl, Aramaic incantation texts from Nippur, Notes for "Text 4" (pp. 321, 330), the figure is not a daemon, but a sorcerer, and the text itself does not mention Lilith. This image should therefore be replaced with an incantation bowl that is actually associated with Lilith. I have found https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/image/738313001, but this image is under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. Shufel (talk) 18:39, 21 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.png){kind=small}
