View source for Talk:Da vinci code

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