This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death 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.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe 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.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory 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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Textile Arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of textile arts 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.Textile ArtsWikipedia:WikiProject Textile ArtsTemplate:WikiProject Textile ArtsTextile Arts articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy 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.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
The reference to Lillian Schwartz is incorrect. In or about 2009, she was interviewed by a production company primarily about her scientific and historical research into the objective match-up between da Vinci's Self Portrait and the Mona Lisa. Upon the first match-up using the program Pico, she shouted, "It's a match." The company then asked how she applied the same techniques to the face of the Shroud. Using various programs and historical research, she discovered that Leonardo had used the face of his Vitruvian Man to redo the Shroud's face. The company edited the sound bite, "It's a match" from the Mona Lisa discovery to make it appear that she was saying that da Vinci again used his own face for the Shroud. Alas for not having approval rights, this misstatement was incorporated into Britain's Channel 5 documentary on the Shroud. The embarrassment has been unending as the 'claim' has affected her straightforward,, scientific work. LaurensRS (talk) 11:32, 29 April 2012 (UTC)LaurensRS[reply]
This sentence from the lead does not seem to be what the body of the article says. I could not find any historian mentioned there who says there even is a history of the Shroud before 1390. Maybe it's my fault. If not, the sentence should make the facts clearer and say there is no such history. --Hob Gadling (talk) 16:37, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The whole "Prior to the 14th century" section is far too long, given the fact that the thing did not exist prior to the 14th century. --Hob Gadling (talk) 10:13, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I reduced the large lede paragraph which was "summarizing" a large section of fringe material. The reason was that the lede is required to summarize the material in the body of the article, and much of the fringe material in question has been cleaned out of the article as per WP:FRINGE. I did not delete the fringe material from the lede entirely, just reduced the large amount of detail in the lede. Wdford (talk) 12:51, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
