Difference between revisions of "Talk:Da vinci code"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 
The Da Vinci code article needed a LOT of work.  I believe that the original author or authors have something of a misapprehension of the nature of an encyclopedia, which is really an objective source of basic information, rather than a source of editorial commentary.  Specifically, the detailed refutation of the Da Vinci code's narrative has no place in a encyclopedic work; it'd be a fine blog or magazine article or something of the sort, but it's really got no place in a work of general reference.  I did my best to clean up a lot of very subjective, biased language, but if anybody else cares to do more, there's more that can be done.
 
The Da Vinci code article needed a LOT of work.  I believe that the original author or authors have something of a misapprehension of the nature of an encyclopedia, which is really an objective source of basic information, rather than a source of editorial commentary.  Specifically, the detailed refutation of the Da Vinci code's narrative has no place in a encyclopedic work; it'd be a fine blog or magazine article or something of the sort, but it's really got no place in a work of general reference.  I did my best to clean up a lot of very subjective, biased language, but if anybody else cares to do more, there's more that can be done.
 +
 +
-- Snark

Revision as of 01:34, February 23, 2007

The Da Vinci code article needed a LOT of work. I believe that the original author or authors have something of a misapprehension of the nature of an encyclopedia, which is really an objective source of basic information, rather than a source of editorial commentary. Specifically, the detailed refutation of the Da Vinci code's narrative has no place in a encyclopedic work; it'd be a fine blog or magazine article or something of the sort, but it's really got no place in a work of general reference. I did my best to clean up a lot of very subjective, biased language, but if anybody else cares to do more, there's more that can be done.

-- Snark