Talk:The Book of the Damned

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Book of the Damned article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Paranormal

	This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.ParanormalWikipedia:WikiProject ParanormalTemplate:WikiProject Paranormalparanormal articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

non-NPOV

The line "...Fort tends to ramble in this book more so than his later ones. Still, it's a very readable book for those interested in this subject, and a solid introduction to Fort and his works." seems to violate NPOV. It reads like a book review. If it is quoted from a book review, a citation would be appreciated.

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 13:48, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lisbon quake missing or dead?

the supposed disappearance of several hundred people in a shelter during the 1755 Lisbon Earthquake; the bodies of the "missing" were discovered in late 2006

Is that the same as [1]? All the (similar) articles on this story refer to mass grave rather than shelter. MartinSFSA (talk) 13:18, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm deleting the bit about the bodies being discovered in 2006. a) this article is about what the book and what is cites, not about the phenomena it describes themselves, so evidence about these phenomena that has arisen since is tangential at best; b) this tangential comment was added in a grammatically in appropriate way, as if another item in the list of phenomena (more appropriate would be parenthetically after the item it comments on); c) it has no reference. I can't find anything supporting it, and if the bit that MartinSFSA referenced above is what was had in mind then the connection is mistaken. --Ericjs (talk) 07:23, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]