Talk:Rosslyn Chapel

What are we, Local Tourism Wiki now? ωεαşεζøίɗ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 20:57, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Well, International Tourism. OK, I know I have written it in a tongue-in-cheek manner, but as well as illustrating some of the absurd theories surrounding Roslin Chapel, I did want to touch on some of effects (both positive and negative) that the exploitation of interest in these theories can have. The Chapel has benefited from its increased income which has helped fund the much needed restoration work. However the effects on the local community are not so straightforward. WhaleyTim (talk) 22:59, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

But why should this website or its readers care? The effects on the local economy of a local site being mentioned in a work of fiction don't really fall within our missions. Wèàšèìòìď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 23:21, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Would 'funding the repairs' be one of the positives of the Da Vinci Code? 86.191.145.56 (talk) 23:17, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

The actual conspiracy group

Is the continuing 'Order of Artistic, Literary and Architectural etc Puzzle Makers' (who wish to ensure that their work is looked after by future generations). Their guiding principle is James Joyce's comment on Ulysses (see [1]) and they are in conflict with the 'X was here' group (who emerged shortly after writing was invented - citation not needed). Anna Livia (talk) 11:46, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Horned Moses

This may be a mistranslation issue - but there are various websites which claim otherwise. Anna Livia (talk) 12:42, 24 March 2020 (UTC)