From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Da Vinci Code article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
|
|
|
Article policies
|
|
This article is part of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the General Project Discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions. |
B |
This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. |
High |
This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. |
Article Grading:
The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
|
|
|
This discussion page may contain trolling. Before you post any reply, consider how you might minimize the effects of trollish comments. Simply ignoring certain comments may be the best option. If you must respond, a temperate response is always best, whether trolling is suspected or not. |
|
This is a controversial topic, which may be under dispute.
Please read this talk page and discuss substantial changes here before making them.
Make sure you supply full citations when adding information to highly controversial articles. |
|
The Da Vinci Code has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
[edit] Opening paragraph
Why does the article open with an uncited paragraph, claiming that "scholars" see the claims made in the Da Vinci Code as baseless? They may be baseless, but is that really the way to open a neutral article about the book? What happened to references? It's hardly fair and NPOV to commence to article by immediately claiming it to be entirely factually baseless.