The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. Ifconsensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.
Shroud of Turin is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 25, 2004.
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 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
To give better information. --Hob Gadling (talk) 04:17, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not all theories are equally valuable. It is noteworthy that a theory departs significantly from the mainstream view in the field. Such theories are called fringe theories. See Wikipedia:Fringe theories for the guidelines on this.--Srleffler (talk) 19:44, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This term is rarely used and appears dismissive and intentional. The carbon dating is the only test to suggest inauthenticity and has reason to be questioned. There are many issues that must be explained even if the C-14 test is rock solid. How was it made? Explain all those points: the blood, the anatomical accuracy in negative, the pollens, and so on. To simply state, "Carbon-14!" shows that one has no answer for everything else.
So you use the term "fringe theories." That is the reason. 24.19.128.64 (talk) 21:05, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are many threads of evidence which debunk the authenticity of the shroud, and C14 is only one of them. People who think that you throw a shroud upon a bleeding corpse and you get something like a portrait photo have lost their common sense. It's so basically obvious that if you don't get the point I have a bridge to sell you. People do sophisticated scientific research for something looking like a product for April Fools' Day. tgeorgescu (talk) 21:45, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The shroud looks ridiculous, but it is a great way to bring tourists to Turin. Dimadick (talk) 23:16, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A portrait photo that has features of medieval art. Also, blood, the anatomical accuracy in negative, the pollens, and so on are debunked in the sources cited in the article. They are wishful thinking by religious zealots who happen to be scientists. --Hob Gadling (talk) 06:38, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. This is an open debate and the term "fringe" is sometimes applied by one side to discredit the other. Its use here is applied incorrectly. 50.225.175.210 (talk) 15:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are not two equal sides here. There is a mainstream scientific point of view, and there are fringe theories outside the mainstream. There is not an "open debate" between mainstream science and fringe theories. That's not how it works. --Srleffler (talk) 20:46, 21 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
