Flat Earth was one of the Philosophy and religion good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. 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.
Article milestones Date Process Result September 20, 2006 Good article nominee Listed October 23, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted September 9, 2009 Good article reassessment Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

History of Science High‑importance This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content 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. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Bible High‑importance 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Skepticism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory, conspiracy theories, and skepticism 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.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Geography Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography 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.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Geography To-do list: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles. Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes Map : See Wikipedia requested maps Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability Photo : See Wikipedia requested photographs of places Stubs : See Geography stubs Ancient Near East High‑importance 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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Alternative views High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative viewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative viewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative viewsAlternative views High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

• What I think should be changed:

After "Belief in flat Earth", and before "Alternate or mixed theories" section, please add the following new section:

Scholars have noted substantial challenges when characterizing ancient cosmography as belief in a "flat Earth". For instance, Jeffrey Burton Russell observed that many ancient and medieval maps, such as the T and O maps, "were intended to represent only a portion of the sphere."^[1] The Greek concept of oikoumene, which influenced many ancient cosmographies, referred to known lands rather than all of Earth.^[2]

Additionally, Wayne Horowitz's study of Mesopotamian texts found "significant variety" in cosmological views across different time periods, concluding that ancient cosmographies are not monolithic.^[3] Other scholars distinguish between cosmographies that are literal versus everyday observation "phenomenological" accounts, such as the word "sunrise" which is not strictly scientific.^[4] Additionally, Historian James Hannam notes that debates in ancient China focused primarily on whether the earth was square or circular, as opposed to flatness.^[5]

Although ancient cultures may have held cosmographies which differ substantially from the modern spherical Earth model, they do challenge direct comparisons with modern flat Earth beliefs.

• Why it should be changed:

Per WP:NPOV, legitimate scholarly debates improve overall article neutrality. The article presents ancient cosmographies without acknowledging different interpretations discussed in academic literature. This subsection provides additional scholarly context from peer-reviewed sources. Russell's Inventing the Flat Earth is already a key source for this article; Horowitz is a standard academic reference in Assyriology; Hannam's book was reviewed in the British Journal for the History of Science (2024); and Greenwood is published by an academic press.

What this does not claim:

1. It does not claim ancient peoples knew the Earth was spherical

2. It does not claim ancient flat-Earth beliefs must be a "myth"

3. It does not remove or minimize any existing content

• References supporting the possible change:

1. Russell, Jeffrey Burton (1991). Inventing the Flat Earth: Columbus and Modern Historians. Praeger. pp. 17–18. ISBN 978-0-275-93956-4.
2. Horowitz, Wayne (1998). Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography. Eisenbrauns. ISBN 978-0-931464-99-7.
3. Greenwood, Kyle (2015). Scripture and Cosmology: Reading the Bible Between the Ancient World and Modern Science. IVP Academic. p. 69. ISBN 978-0-8308-2561-5.
4. Hannam, James (2023). The Globe: How the Earth Became Round. Reaktion Books. pp. 178–193. ISBN 978-1-78914-758-2.
5. Herodotus, Histories, 4.8, 4.36.

~2026-13532-4 (talk) 19:23, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"In my own words"? Wikipedia is not a blog. Maybe start one instead? --Fama Clamosa (talk) 19:35, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I meant it in a way that I did not use LLMs when writing this verison. Fixed the title to specify this. ~2026-13532-4 (talk) 19:56, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t see the relevance of much of the edit request. T-O maps are not presented in the article as evidence of belief in a flat earth and have no bearing on the matter. Oikoumene is not presented in the article as evidence of belief in a flat earth and has no bearing on the matter. Chinese debates about square versus circular are not about flat versus spherical, they are about what shape of flat. It would be fine to mention that Mesopotamian models were not exclusively flat, as long as it is clear that none of them were spherical.

If the intent is to help the reader understand that ancient models were not uniformly flat, that is fine, but we can’t establish that as editors through accreting various sources that discuss various things. We need a reliable source that clearly says so as a consequence of a scholarly survey of civilizations worldwide. Yes, I know there were many ancient models. No, I cannot just say that. If your intent for the scholarly interpretation section is to build up such an understanding in the reader without directly saying so, I’m not opposed, but as noted, the only relevant example was Mesopotamia. And there is also the problem that this article is about flat earth beliefs, not cosmological models that are neither flat nor spherical. Strebe (talk) 17:55, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

	This LLM-generated text has been collapsed and should be excluded from assessments of consensus.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
What I think should be changed: Under the "Alternate or mixed theories" section, please add the following new subsection before "Greece: spherical Earth": ====Mesopotamia==== While Mesopotamian cosmology is often characterized as depicting a flat disc floating in water, some texts describe a more complex vertically layered structure. The cuneiform text KAR 307 presents three superimposed earths: an "Upper Earth" (the surface inhabited by mankind), a "Middle Earth" (the subterranean Apsu waters assigned to Ea), and a "Lower Earth" (the underworld containing 600 Anunnaki).[1] While none of these models were spherical, Horowitz documents "significant variety" in Mesopotamian cosmological texts across different periods and genres, noting "disagreement between texts from different periods, of different genres, and even among texts from the same period and genre."[1] Why it should be changed: This follows the established pattern in the "South Asia" subsection, which similarly documents cosmological variety as layered disks without claiming spherical knowledge. Horowitz's Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography (Eisenbrauns, 1998) is the standard academic reference in Assyriology. The addition explicitly notes these models were not spherical, addressing previous editorial feedback on this talk page. Chronological placement before Greece is appropriate since these Mesopotamian texts predate Greek spherical Earth theories. References supporting the possible change: Horowitz, Wayne (1998). Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography. Mesopotamian Civilizations. Vol. 8. Eisenbrauns. pp. 16–19, xii–xiv. ISBN 978-0-931464-99-7. ~2026-31657-8 (talk) 16:02, 16 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] Not done: your request appears to have been generated by a large language model. Newbzy (talk) 13:10, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] References ^ a b Horowitz, Wayne (1998). Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography. Mesopotamian Civilizations. Vol. 8. Eisenbrauns. pp. 16–19, xii–xiv. ISBN 978-0-931464-99-7.

• What I think should be changed:

Under the "Alternate or mixed theories" section, please add the following new subsection before "Greece: spherical Earth":

====Mesopotamia====

Although Mesopotamian cosmology is usually depicted as a flat disc of land floating in water, some texts describe a complex structure composed of vertical layers. For instance, KAR 307, a cuneiform text, depicts three layered earths. The "Upper Earth" is the land inhabited by mankind, the "Middle Earth" are subterranean Apsu waters ruled by Enki, and the "Lower Earth" is the underworld which has 600 Anunnaki.^[1] While none of the ancient Mesopotamian models were spherical, Professor Wayne Horowitz documents "significant variety" in different Mesopotamian cosmological texts, noting "disagreement between texts from different periods, of different genres, and even among texts from the same period and genre."^[1]

• Why it should be changed:

This is similar to the established pattern in the "South Asia" subsection, which also documents cosmological variety as layered disks, but not as spheres. Horowitz's Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography (Eisenbrauns, 1998) is known as the standard academic reference in Assyriology. The addition also notes these models were not spherical, addressing previous editorial feedback on this talk page. Finally, chronological placement before Greece is appropriate, since Mesopotamian texts were created before Greek spherical Earth theories.

• References supporting the possible change:

1. Horowitz, Wayne (1998). Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography. Mesopotamian Civilizations. Vol. 8. Eisenbrauns. pp. 16–19, xii–xiv. ISBN 978-0-931464-99-7.

~2026-31657-8 (talk) 16:50, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Edited. Carf EN (talk) 17:03, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Highly appreciated that we see alternate theories more frequently. Only issue is that you left an extra new line beneath the paragraph, so there is an oversized white space. ~2026-31657-8 (talk) 17:06, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In the source code...

texts from different periods, of different genres, and even among texts from the same period and genre."<ref name="Horowitz1998"/>

====Greece: spherical Earth====

should become

texts from different periods, of different genres, and even among texts from the same period and genre."<ref name="Horowitz1998"/>

====Greece: spherical Earth====

Very simple formatting change, to remove extra whitespace. ~2026-31657-8 (talk) 18:53, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Day Creature (talk) 19:38, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect The Earth is Really Flat has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 January 23 § The Earth is Really Flat until a consensus is reached. consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 18:27, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]