::::PaulB has done a good job of explaining why a discussion truth claims made by characters in a work of fiction belong in the article.  Let me develop the idea of serving the user a bit more.  I think that paper encylopedia writers were and continue to be frustrated by the necessities of the format.  When I prepare matter for print it involves many considerations that I don't have in the electronic format. 

 ::::If there were a best-selling and much-discussed novel that placed New York City in the southwest United States, we know we're dealing with a radically different world from ours.  On the other hand, if New York City is located in the right place and time but has the French as its original European settlers rather than the Dutch. We wonder  why did the author do that? Was it deliberate or unintended?  Does it add anything to the plot?  Is there any evidence in our world of attempted settlement by the French prior to the Dutch? (etc.) 

 ::::A work of fiction which is not a fantasy starts out with premises and a back story which is presented as fact.  Think of the absolute commitment to accuracy which Patrick O'Brian made to create the character of Jack Aubrey, Dan Brown is his polar opposite.  That there are so many points of discussion on DVC is a problem (or opportunity) which originates in Brown's choice to tinker with religion, history, art, and archeology.