The new wording doesn't make sense at all. There does not exist a single agreed upon definition of the word religion, but they all generally go along the lines of A system of practices which act according to beliefs ... Obviously, Noah's Ark is not in a system of practises (sounds awkward now doesn't it?). Or perhaps consider these two :In Egyptian religion, Duat (or Tuat) (also called Akert, Amenthes, or Neter-khertet) is the underworld. and :In the scientific method, evolution is change in the inherited traits of a population of organisms from one generation to the next. It's just wrong. Mythology is the most sensible word by definition, and is backed by reliable sources. To avoid it because some editors don't like it is way foul of a NPOV. Noah's Ark belongs to Abrahamic mythology, Duat to Egyptian mythology and evolution to biology. I would support the Abrahamic mythology wikilink over the more wordy Judeo-Christian and Islamic version I proposed, which addresses Til's concern above.  I don't know why Til is talking about proving this to be mythology, he still doesn't seem to get that it's a classification. I won't comment on the rest of the suggestion yet, since it's likely things will only have to change depending on how the intro sentence turns out.     