Talk:Opus Dei/Archive 2006-4

message: I've completed some further updates to my version of the article-- I, of course, encouraged you to make use of it.  If the cutting/summarizing process seems to be actively ongoing, I'll hold off on any further steps.  If the goal is 67k, though, then I imagine that the process has almost concluded, and any major changes will have to be made as a result of some future consensus for change.  I still strongly advise a 30k length goal and the inclusion of response history.  --Alecmconroy 09:55, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Next steps

message: I added an image of the cover of the Da Vinci Code, replacing the book cover of Massimo Introvigne. This is another possible way of acceding to the ideas of Alecmconroy that The Da Vinci Code be given more prominence in the article and that criticism and controversy be given more attention. :) Thomas 02:39, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, it's a step in the right direction.  I still don't see why ya'll don't want the Da Vinci Code section.  The novel has sold 60 million copies, making it the 8th most-read book in human hisory.  The film had the second largest opening weekend sales of any movie in history-- it's made 700 million dollars so far, which I think means it's safe to say that at least 700 million people have seen it.  It may be sad to say, but The Da Vinci Code, in some ways, is more relevant to the public perception of Opus Dei than The Way is. --Alecmconroy 03:44, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Book cover of the Da Vinci Code 

message: I expanded the response history for greater coverage. Rabadur 09:58, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A response history section! yay-- awesome.    I hope you'll be putting in my coherent summary of the contemporary criticism. :)  --Alecmconroy 11:29, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Glad to make you happy, Alec. But don't feel put down if I tell you your summary is a POV-fork, a Section to Avoid, etc. Thomas's one paragraph summary is just perfect. Rabadur 12:07, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: hehehe, no, I kinda figured you'd say that.  But, hey, just agreeing we should have a response history is a step in the right direction. --Alecmconroy 12:09, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Response history

message: A user with IP adress 4.236.63.198 added [a paragraph].
This is fairly outlandish and I suggest the user rechecks his/her sources for accuracy. A lot of effort has been put into trying to make this page balanced. Thebike 07:40, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, that text is definitely inappropriate.  As you'll find out, this article attracts a lot of editors who try to inject their own views about Opus Dei in to the text.  We've had to semi-protect the article before because of this sort of thing (making it impossible for anonymous and new users to edit the article).  Good job cutting it out.  --Alecmconroy 11:25, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this justified? 

message: You might want to check this out:       m#      m_and_the_Catholic_Church--Nino Gonzales 13:27, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for informing, Nino. I did some changes last week but they were shot down. I did some tweaking a couple of minutes ago. We'll have to see if it holds. Lafem 02:21, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Opus Dei and Franco