Talk:The 39 Clues

Website

Does anyone think it's necessary to add the website content to this? A major part of The 39 Clues is the website. Only 10 clues are given from the books, therefore, the remaining 29 clues will be achieved thru the cards and the website. Maybe sections such as My Profile, My Cards, The Game, Cahill Website, etc. Thoughts?? Jmpresto (talk) 01:01, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Even though it is unlikely, more than one clue may be discovered in the next book, so it may be possible that more clues will be revealed from the books. But I think that it might be important to add a short summary for every section of the website. If anybody wanted any more information, they could always check the website itself.Jimbrock (talk) 20:34, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Why can't "the hunt is about Hope," quote be about the Hope diamond, which the mission following that book is all about, and about Hope cahill? they seem to fit both, but eveytime i change it to both someone changes it back. Is there something i'm missing? If not the other person need to stop changing it back and saying it is not about the hope diamond. Ldtruck82193 —Preceding undated comment added 17:05, 10 November 2009 (UTC).

Image copyright problem with Image:The Maze of Bones.jpg

The image Image:The Maze of Bones.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --10:01, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

About the Clues

NO ONE must put the clues here. It spoils the readers and fans (such as myself). No one put this again. Albertdaniel222 (talk) 13:26, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually, Albertdaniel222, that is pretty much opposite to Wikipedia policy. This is an encyclopedia for facts, not a fan site. This issue was discussed long ago, and the decision was that editors can't start concealing things because they believe it would "spoil it". Someone who comes to Wikipedia should expect an uncensored description.

This makes sense for several reasons, when you consider. What is a spoiler for one person is not the same as for someone else. I remember reading one movie review that described a "Star Wars" film as George Lucas' "dirtiest trick". I immediately guessed what the dirty trick was, and I was quite annoyed that the movie had been spoiled for me. The points are these: If I didn't want to know about the movie before I watched it, I shouldn't have been reading the review. If the reviewer avoided writing *anything* that *might* spoil it for me, then...they probably couldn't write much of anything at all. (This happened to me just yesterday, I was editing the article for Spock, and was annoyed that someone had described his role in the new movie.) Well...I shouldn't have given into temptation. It wasn't Wikipedia's fault. Regards, Piano non troppo (talk) 23:08, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, yes. Well, will ANYONE put this "descriptions" again? Albertdaniel222 (talk) 05:14, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

There s a video trailer that you can find on youtube. if you watch carefully, you can see the ekat sign with amy's anme under it, and dan's name under the tomas sign.

---

henhen —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.12.243.14 (talk) 22:44, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a forum. Please make note of it. ToadettePink (talk) 01:52, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Worst Literature Article Ever Written

I was just curious about this book, so I peeked at this article. I was surprised- it seems to be written by a kid! 124.106.9.55 (talk) 13:53, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Reminds me of doing my "homework" and reading an Animorph book by K. A. Applegate. I thought, "I could write one of these in three weeks!" Then I read an interview. Turns out she writes 'em in two. Ha, ha, ha.

I read parts of a couple books in The 39 Clues series, and wasn't particularly shocked at the writing. (I did note that the number of pages is dropping considerably as the series goes on, while the price is not.) Perhaps you aren't in the target audience? At any rate, to criticize in the Wiki article itself, find a reliable source, and quote a sentence from there, with citation. Piano non troppo (talk) 22:56, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

it was writen by a kid because it is a childrens book and mostly children play the game and by the way, and to the next person and mabye your to old to read these books or too stupid to injoy them and finnally to the lant person you have to read the whole book to injoy it

It is a pretty terrible article. Really poorly written.

Please put in your mind that Wikipedia is trying to improve all pages to make it a better place. This page has been improved, or you can improve it yourself if you think it's so terrible! ToadettePink (talk) 19:09, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

And, also, the authors are adults, it is proven. ToadettePink (talk) 01:53, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Cards

I think that this section should be split into a new article. This section is already long, but it is going to get a lot longer. There is a lot more information that can be added to the section, like describing how the cards look and what is on them. Also, another big chart that is a list of the cards in Card Pack 2 can be added right now. In the future, two more of these charts can be added for card packs 3 and 4. So this section will become very, very long. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ag97 (talk • contribs) 14:48, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

...Even after two years it doesn't need an article, it is not too long.ToadettePink (talk) 19:13, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Irina Spasky

She seems like the character to follow in the books. One moment trying to kill the children, and the next moment trying to save their lies. It is said that she had a son of her own who died after he was a toddler. Also, she recognized one of the men in the Black Circle (of which she is the creator of). In case anybody didn't notice, she shares the same middle name as Anastasia. Relation? To NRR? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.238.30.225 (talk) 02:29, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok, First, it was she who died in In to Deep, so you v=cant follow her anymore. NRR is an only child, and has no other close family since they were assainated. The man was in the circle but not a part of it, he was probably there to protect Ammy and Dan, or destroy the clue after they found it. No i didnt notice the simularity to the middle names, but they are both russian, so that may explain that. Probably decended from the same child of Luke, and was that person's first name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ldtruck82193 (talk • contribs) 17:10, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

In case you didn't know, Russian people's middle names come from their father. Ex. Father=Ruslan Middle name=Ruslanova. So Anastasia's father name was Nicholas, hence Nikolaivena. So I'm guessing that Irina's father's name is also Nicholas. 99.243.232.227 (talk) 19:14, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Relatives

Is it safe to speculate that people such as Ted Kennedy (JFK's younger brother) and Caroline Kennedy (JFK's daughter) are from the Tomas branch considering JFK is from that branch and that Roy Disney (Walt's brother) is from the Janus branch since Walt Disney is from this branch too. Technically they would be from those branches but i don't know if we should add them. if we do, we cannot add parents, grandparents, half-siblings, etc. because we don't know which parent is the Cahill. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Superchicken781 (talk • contribs) 00:40, 31 August 2009 (UTC) No it isn't because people who are related don't have the same traits. Look at Padma and her twin in the Harry Potter series. They're TWINS, aren't they? But they're in different houses. Same thing here. Look at Gordon Korman and his son. Gordon's a Janus and his son's a LUCIAN. Does that tell you anything? 99.243.232.227 (talk) 19:17, 23 December 2009 (UTC)Ekat dad too - Camphalfbloodseries

Only if the 39 clues websites or the books say so. Otherwise no, the Kennedys aren't Tomas. ToadettePink (talk) 19:12, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Where Did You Hear That From?

I couldn't help but notice in the article it says that in book 7 that "it is belived they will visit a Tomas Stronghold" and about book 8 "It is said that Aunt Beatrice's detective wil find Amy and Dan". Says Who? Where did you hear this? I didn't een read that Aunt Beatrice has a detective! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Himboy484wikidude (talk • contribs) 23:16, 1 September 2009 (UTC) ---Didn't you read book one??? Their aunt had a detective after them as soon as the fire happened, and they ran off with their au pair!!! Fangride (talk) 04:33, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

It might have just been some vandalism. ToadettePink (talk) 01:56, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

The Secrets of Their Parents Past

The 1st video was supposed to come out yesterday! Why is it not up, and where was this information found? Also, if it is up, what is the link? Fangride (talk) 04:36, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Response to Fangride's response on the "Where Did You Hear That From?" Section

Okay Fangride, respond to this and tell me what page it says that on. While you do that, I am going to find my lost copy of the first book. Should take 5 minutes. Okay, so tell me soon! Sincerely, Himboy484wikidude —Preceding unsigned comment added by Himboy484wikidude (talk • contribs) 00:43, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

-I believe after the fire, Nellie tells them about the detective... I'm not sure.

pg 214: Mr McIntyre tells them "Your aunt has hired a private detective to find you." 71.129.87.223 (talk) 20:03, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

READ THE 39 CLUES SERIES NOW!!!!

The 39 clues is an amazing series, you never know what will happen next. Each book is written by a different author, and there are so many od twists and turns. Once you start reading, you won't be able to put it down! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.230.1.193 (talk) 22:17, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a forum. If you would like more information on that you may look at this page: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Rosalina2427 (talk) 03:13, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Book 3

What happened. Wheres the section for book 3. Tennispro45 00:45, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Its there. Section 4.3. Didn't you read the article? --Himboy484wikidude (talk) 15:08, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Book seven

How can you not know the title of book seen? I thought it was end of days. Once the article said that.I checked it the next day and poof it wasn't there. I guess it isn't.End of days doesn't sound right too. I gess it isn't that. What is it? Rock on and keep reading the seires, 206.53.153.226 (talk) 00:29, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

MISSION 5 LATE SEPTEMBER

I believe Mission 5 says coming "Late September". SO IT'S GONNA COME OUT IN LATE SEPTEMBEr. When's That? NOW? Hmm... I'll go check.

Death of their parents.

10/9/09 Does anybody know how the Holts are involved in the deaths of Amy & Dan's parents? Don't bother arguing that they aren't, becuase it says so on the back of Card 90: Hamilton Holt. PS: Do any of you know basic english? I feel like I'm reading a 5-year old's handiwork. Also, please put the Clues section back.

     Thank you,
         Anonymous

The Holts where probably there the night before the fire, at least the dad was, with Isabel Kabra, Irina, and Alistar. actually mary todd and eisenhower were there with isabel alistair and cora. irina went away as said from book 6 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jetfeather (talk • contribs) 08:16, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a forum. Please make note. ToadettePink (talk) 01:57, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

cahill

11/03/09 it turnes out that Cahill is a real family name. guess what they are from Ireland this is one of their crests [1] common variations of this name are O'Cahill Cahille Cahil Cahel etc.

--75.19.39.152 (talk) 00:29, 5 November 2009 (UTC) vinsoncahill

The 39 clues, Amy and Dan's branch.

Well, I think they are Madrigals. Because the man in black, (Madrigal) Always is either following Amy and Dan or is watching them. Plus I don't think it would be fair if Amy and Dan belong to one branch, because most of us aren't Madrigals. Right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.70.185.91 (talk) 00:32, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Noone has entered under the madigal branch that i know of, Madrigal or Janus are probably what Amy and Dan are. Friske, Grace's brother was a painter thus maybe a janus, also, Grace flew, a janus art. Nellie most likely seems janus for her flying, love of music, and the art of cooking, also. The Man in Black sounds like Friske though, so maybe they belong to both Janus and Madrigal. Desiended from Jane, but converted to madrigal. One problam is that amy and Dan's Dad, Auther Trent, sounds like a Tomas, not one of the stupid tomas either. Trent knew Holt, sounds like they were rivals in school or coladge or something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.18.242.224 (talk) 16:22, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

eisenhower and arthur were roommates at west point (card #145). eisenhower hates him cause he got him expelled. and i was thinking lucian cause theyre good w/ puzzles and codes and so is dan. flamingmonkeyninja —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flamingmonkeyninja (talk • contribs) 22:37, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes, he IS a madrigal, and so are they. HE is ACCTULY there UNLCE :O —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.242.172.189 (talk) 00:21, 22 October 2010 (UTC) no fiske is their great uncle--overshy brother of grace — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jetfeather (talk • contribs) 08:17, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes. thank you for the note. Please do not forget that Wikipedia is not a forum, and spelling errors should be corrected. ToadettePink (talk) 02:01, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Semi-protection Policy

{{editsemiprotected}}

Please change The 39 Clues article to a well-edited article. I always have hard time rechanging edits made messily by unregistered users. This article is mostly seen vandalized by Wikipedia users, and I would like you to participate in protecting it. --FDJoshua22 (talk) 11:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

 Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Furthermore, I do not understand what you want to do. If you want it to be semi-protected, you should make a request at the appropriate page. Brian Jason Drake 11:53, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Madrigals

Abigail Adams and Amelia Earhart were. I think Amy was partly right about Amelia protecting the world "from" the Madrigals. I think The "madrigals" Were protcting the world "from" the "cahills" In the Liberty Bell there was a note to Sidney George Reilly from the M.

Wikipedia is not a place to publish ideas. Also please do not forget to sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes. ToadettePink (talk) 02:02, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Hidden Messages

How about a section on the hidden messages in the books? 69.108.2.30 (talk) 20:45, 31 January 2010 (UTC) i know them wanna me to add to my talk page? --Jetfeather (talk) 08:20, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Re: RockyRob

To RockRob, what the heck did you do with the book summaries?! It made the page look like a forum or a fan website. The older summary meets Wikipedia's guidelines as being precise and relevant. I hope someone can revert his edits. --FDJoshua22 04:16, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

...User:Rockyrob is not registered as an account. ToadettePink (talk) 19:22, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Editsemiprotected

{{editsemiprotected}} Although the text was removed by another user, I would ask that this page could be semi protected to prevent further incidents like this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthewmdm (talk • contribs) 18:48, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

If you want this page semiprotected, you will need to ask at the Request For Page Protection Page. Set Sail For The Seven Seas 289° 56' 30" NET 19:19, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Split up

I propose that some of the parts of this article are split up into seperate articles, for instance, the large part about the characters could be put into List of 39 Clues Characters. This would help to clean it up. Rock drum (talk·contribs·guestbook) 18:17, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

You may have a point. But still, if someone will create another The 39 Clues-related article, it should meet Wikipedia's policy guidelines, unlike The 39 Clues Cards. --FDJoshua22 09:03, 10 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by FDJoshua22 (talk • contribs)

After reading the WP:SIZE guidelines I think the article is fine for now, since the size should go down once this article is just cleaned up (i.e., original research and trivia removed). I think the focus should be on cleaning up this article and especially The 39 Clues Cards before spinning off a new article which would be begging for more speculation and excessive detail. VernoWhitney (talk) 14:33, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

How do the My Agent Cards violate Wikipedia policy??? As stated in an earlier discussion, cards are an essential part of The 39 Clues series. The My Agent Cards are no different. Anyone with a 39 Clues account can go online and add these cards to get digital copies and verify the information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.193.250.188 (talk) 15:03, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Listing the cards is original research, and even if it had sources, they would be unreliable. The fact that there are "My Agent Cards" is fine, but that's no reason to list everything. Unless "their entries are famous because they are associated with or significantly contribute to the list topic" this is also a clear violation of WP:NOTDIRECTORY. VernoWhitney (talk) 15:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

How is this any different from the other card lists and card combos that are on the page? The My Agent Cards ARE associated with this list topic. They are a part of the series and the game. How is it unreliable info if you can check it? The only part of what was listed in the table that would be unreliable would be the rank (as it changes as you play the game) and the date added (since users can put whatever they want). Why not delete the two "unreliable" columns but leave the rest? Why take away information that people are clearly looking at and using (based on the edits made to the my agent cards list)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.193.250.188 (talk) 16:23, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

And how is this original reseach?? (Yes, I've read the link that you put up.) All info CAN be verified by going to the39clues.com (which is the official website for this series) and entering the card codes. The same is true for the bonus cards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.193.250.188 (talk) 17:26, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Can I assume that since you are not answering my questions that I have valid arguments and can put the list back up in the modified form (without the "unreliable" information)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.193.250.188 (talk) 14:09, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Not to get snippy, but you can assume that I have a life outside of Wikipedia and that I sleep occasionally. As far as it being original research, the policy I linked to explicitly says "Do not add unsourced material from your personal experience, as that would make Wikipedia a primary source of that material." If this is the only place that the list exists then it's original research (which appears to be the case as editors have been posting single cards, presumably theirs, or cards that are found on forums (which are not WP:Reliable sources)). If anyone can go to the39clues.com and there is already a list of everybody's card (without you having to enter them in beforehand) then it may be acceptable, but is still likely giving WP:UNDUEWEIGHT unless sharing these user created cards is very important to the collectible card aspect of The 39 Clues (since the list made up almost half of the article). As I understand it, the ranks and the non-user-created cards are of significantly more importance. Does that clear things up at all? VernoWhitney (talk) 15:50, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

I still don't see how this is any different from the Bonus cards. Is there a list of these outside of wikipedia from a reliable source? Because I haven't seen one. And yes, sharing these user created cards is very important to the collectible card aspect of The 39 Clues. If it's an issue of length, can't the My Agent Cards list go on a separate page? Again, all info can be verified through the official website of the 39 clues. And I can't imagine the official website is not a reliable source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.193.250.188 (talk) 16:20, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

If the Bonus cards are no different, then they should probably be removed also. And it's not just an issue of length, it's an issue with everything I've said before. I understand that you can go through and check them one by one, but that is still original research as I said before. All content on Wikipedia should at the very least be verifiable (which this information probably is), not original research (which is the biggest problem with this, unless I'm missing something), and from a neutral point of view (which brings us back to the problem of undue weight, but if you can explain how sharing of these cards is very important could be overcome). Finally, content should not be simply a directory of things or a fan site, but that's probably less of an issue than the original research one. VernoWhitney (talk) 16:47, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

To say that these cards are more important than the non-user-created cards would not be true; however, to say that these cards are unimportant in the game would also be untrue. As far as being collectible, each card is unique. It has a unique number, name, and card code. It is also important in the game to share these cards. Sharing your card and adding other people's cards helps you gain medals which increases your prestige. Gaining prestige helps you move up the ranks in your branch.

[2]

[3]

[4]

Some of the medals you can gain by adding agent cards are: Kingpin, Commander, Ringleader, Associate, Diplomat, Conspirator, Insider, Accomplice. These medals can only be gained by sharing My Agent Cards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.193.250.188 (talk) 14:15, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

So that information that you listed right there, or something like it, can be added to that section of the article (with the sources you found), but that's still not a reason to list each of the cards. VernoWhitney (talk) 15:30, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

How about a list of characters at List of 39 Clues Characters? We can just copy the list from this article and replace it with a {{main}} template or a few of the characters. What does anyone think? Rock drum (talk·contribs·guestbook) 10:22, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Winifred Thembeka

Could someone please put her? I had always read her in articles and blogs about The 39 Clues: The Viper's Nest. I don't have the book yet, and thus, I don't know what is her importance in the novel. All I know is that she is a librarian.--FDJoshua22 15:50, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

winifred is graces best friend and was alike in their souls. they spent a lot of time with each other --Jetfeather (talk) 08:26, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

It has info on Winifred Thembeka in the page now. ToadettePink (talk) 19:19, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Come on!!!

I got the 39 clues official agent guide which said that book 9 was to be called Storm Warning and that it would involve Anne Bonny! Why did you guys delete it?!? -- AquaTeen13 —Preceding undated comment added 15:01, 26 March 2010 (UTC).

It needs to be cited so that it's verifiable information: Does it have information like an ISBN number or an author? VernoWhitney (talk) 15:17, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind, I found it at bn.com, I'll re-add the information with a citation to the source. VernoWhitney (talk) 15:20, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Various

A lot of the references on this page are on Various.wikibruce which is another wiki. Should these be used? If we can't use IMDB for references then I don't think we should be able to use other wikis. Thanks, Rock drum (talk·contribs·guestbook) 12:39, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

No, they shouldn't be used at all. However, if I recall the wikibruce pages actually cite page numbers and the like, which is what we should use to replace the wikibruce references. I just haven't had enough time and interest to go through and start replacing them yet. VernoWhitney (talk) 13:31, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Branches

Ok. Under the section "Branches", the four family branches Tomas, Janus, Ekat, and Lucian are linked. Is this nesscessary as those four branches are listed below? I personally think that should be undone..Homework talkpage 14:53, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree, and I've done it. At least I think I got them all. VernoWhitney (talk) 14:58, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I found it a little annoying. Homework talkpage 15:00, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

173.172.110.23 (talk) 22:37, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 24.6.77.196, 5 June 2010

{{editsemiprotected}}

Please change one of the sentences from the 8th book. It says that they(Amy and Dan) didn't find the slue. However,they did and it is the secretion of silk in it's liquid form. I would also like to point out that Amy and Dan have a fight about their parents and Dan runs away, thus leaading to his kidnap by the Kabras. He meets Jonah Wizard and then at the end of the book reveals his identity to the entire family. The order was wrong. thank you very much

I have read the Vikram Kabra will appear in Book 10: Into the Gauntlet! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.172.108.66 (talk) 16:38, 10 July 2010 (UTC) 24.6.77.196 (talk) 22:32, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —fetch·comms 23:28, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Balete, 26 July 2010

{{editsemiprotected}}

Please remove "Mission 9 is scheduled to be released in the summer of 2010." from this website; its already released in the website http://www.the39clues.com/game/mission9. Thanks forexecuing my request. Balete (talk) 04:38, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

 Done PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 13:12, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

 Delisted Salvio ( ^{Let's talk 'bout it!}) 14:17, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Texclayton, 2 September 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} The Series 2 section has simple typos - "don" instead of "done", "Mogther" instead of "Mother"

-Tex (talk) 16:35, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done Thanks, Celestra (talk) 17:03, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Version of English

Which version is English is supposed to be primarily used in this article? I've seen usage of both and think that one should be clearly established. PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 16:57, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

I would think American English as most of the authors and the publishing company are American (as is the language used in the books, as I recall). That said, I don't actually see any of the differences but it's been quite a while since I've really read this article. VernoWhitney (talk) 17:19, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree, American English. The books started out in America, the authors are American, etc. Should I add the template? --Glimmer721 ^talk 19:38, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

ENOUGH!!!

Some of you people have to be dylexics. You can't spell simple words. It's like reading a four-year-old's spelling work! Really, are you actual dumbos? PLEASE CHECK YOUR GRAMMMAR AT MICROSOFT WORD OR SOMEWHERE ELSE IT CAN BE CHECKED. THANK YOU A LOT. -Camphalfbloodseries —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.224.50.89 (talk) 01:00, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

You could use Google Chrome. It has an automatic spellcheck feature. Llightex (talk) 00:58, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

You could also fix it yourself. Sfoske70 (talk) 21:27, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism

Some idiot added crap about disco dancing and vagabons all over the page... some please fix it --118.137.236.123 (talk) 11:49, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

I have taken care of it. Thanks for noticing. Just remember that anyone is allowed to edit Wikipedia, so you could have corrected it too. PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 14:30, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Romeer hads is that in book 5 in series 2 Dan is going to DIE!None of the chaills like Dan but some wuold kill Amy & dan just to macke it a litte beter!However a new family named the Sprn family only wishs to help all chaills in the race aferter that here about Dan.A 11 yaer old sprn girl named Clover aks Amy to help her to get a book In Alaska that hads a spell to macke a poshone that will bring back the dead!Clover's litte family is falling aprt to.Amys only hope of not being alone is Clover.What will hapin next?!I don't know yet.I don't know if this is the right story ether!Just get redy for THE SPRN'S BOOK! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.191.63.34 (talk) 23:24, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

This is not true; it never happens in any of the books. Rosalina2427 (talk) 03:16, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps you read the wrong book. ToadettePink (talk) 19:15, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Characters

As there is an article entitled List of 39 Clues characters, is the very large character section needed? Glimmer721 ^talk 00:03, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Nope, probably not. PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 04:51, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

The 39 clues

When I was 11 I started to read The 39 clues and I loved it. form goblin9 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goblin9 (talk • contribs) 04:02, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a forum. You may read this in Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is Not. ToadettePink (talk) 19:17, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Vespers Rising

Um, in the vespers rising section, it says More info: vespers rising. But then it just redirects back to the section. Will there ever be a separate page about vespers rising? Llightex (talk) 00:56, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Hm, possibly. Until then I'll just remove the redirect. Thanks for pointing it out! PrincessofLlyr ^{royal court} 04:23, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Movie???

Is there any valid and trusted source about the year of the release of the 39 Clues movie? IMDB^{[The 39 Clues at IMDb]} says 2014. --kongr43gpen^Talk 20:53, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Branch Members

Is it really necessary to have that many members listed for each branch? I'm not sure, but it seems like there is an awful lot, and I don't think we really need all of them. maybe 'There are many famous Lucian members, such as:' and then maybe only have a couple. Or is this all just me? ~Angel~ (talk) 11:27, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

I think it should be sorted to a few key members that play a role in the books, and then maybe others that represent what the branch is about. I'm not exactly an expert in the subject, unfortunately. Glimmer721 ^talk 00:06, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree. I don't really want to do anything without having a couple of people agree. I'm new here, so yeah. But I can't be bothered reading through all the names, and I don't think many other people can either! ~Angel~ (talk) 06:37, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

i can agree with you i've read up to the medusa plot and i know the codes as i added onto the page --Jetfeather (talk) 08:37, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, when you read the Black Book of buried Secrets it lists only 12 to 24 characters, not 30 or 40. 168.103.182.71 (talk) 22:48, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Collaborative_fiction

I've been looking at Category:Collaborative_fiction, which is kind of dominated by 39 clues books - I've added the 39 clues series to the category - would anyone mind if I took the individual books out? AdamCaputo (talk) 15:37, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Madrigal photo

No one has one ready for uploading? It seems essensial to the section. 71.146.20.62 (talk) 15:03, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

It's just the Cahill logo, but I agree that a logo will be necessary. (Balete) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Balete (talk • contribs) 09:45, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Is it really necessary?

Is it really necessary to state ″(again)″ after every author that has already been listed? Quoted:

Rick Riordan, Gordon Korman, Peter Lerangis, Jude Watson, Patrick Carman, Jude Watson (again), Peter Lerangis (again), Gordon Korman (again), Linda Sue Park and Margaret Peterson Haddix.

Your thoughts are greatly appreciated. 75.7.1.51 (talk) 00:22, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes. Yes, it is. ToadettePink (talk) 01:47, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Removal of Rumored Book Titles

I move the following be implemented; 1. Locking again the 39 Clues wiki article, due to its vast inconsistencies in spelling and filled with unproven rumors that placed by members without Wikipedia accounts. 2. Removal of the following "unproven rumors": The titles of the last 3 books of Cahills vs Vespers, which are The Pirates Treasure, Recovering Confidence and The Mastermind Revealed. Noting that the section should be expanded is nonsense; for this is the page many other websites give credit to about these 3 book titles. 3. Simplification of sypnosis of the books and other information; these are already spoilers and will discourage others to read the books but to read the summaries in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Balete (talk • contribs) 09:42, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

File:The Madrigal Branch Logo.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:The Madrigal Branch Logo.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:51, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Some concerns

To italicize or not to italicize? Book titles are italicized, but The 39 Clues and Cahills vs. Vespers are series titles, which are not. Should the italics for the series titles be removed?

The titles of the individual sections about the books are preceded with "Book [number]." The section titles of the series are also numbered as such. Why is this done? I feel it is unnecessary as the books are listed in order. The individual sections also clarify which book it is.

As for book synopses, please do not put copyrighted summaries on here. In addition to copyright issues, they are also written in a tone inappropriate for an encyclopedic article. Also, according to Wikipedia policies, spoilers cannot be deleted. People reading the article should read it with the expectation that it will contain spoilers. See the discussion to delete the Spoilers template.

Hope someone will address the concerns listed in the first two paragraphs. Thanks. Rotideypoc41352 (talk) 19:11, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Day of Doom

I just noticed that the link to Day of Doom redirects to a "religious poem". Just wondering...

Jared Bates 17:02, 23 November 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Computerwizjared (talk • contribs)

I've removed the wikilink to avoid confusion. Rotideypoc41352 (talk) 22:35, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Map

Mabye somone can translate it from hebrew - File:The39clues.png.

• מדינת המוצא = the beginning country
• מדינת הסיום = the final country
• מדינות בהן התגלו רמזים = countries that in there Dan and Amy founded a clue
• In red - the track of Dan and Amy
• In Black - Amy Track
• In green - Dan Track

I'm sorry if my English it's not correct.

Noambarsh (talk) 16:47, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

someone? Noambarsh (talk) 16:11, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't know if such an image is appropriate for the article; it could qualify as intricate detail. Rotideypoc41352 (talk) 22:35, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

The Film

Does anyone know who is going to be in the movie yet? I dont think the people who are on the cards can play thier parts because (A) Amy looks 16-17 (B) Dan has a mustace (C) They ar'nt actors. Please reply as soon as posible. -Farietale — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.113.87.110 (talk) 20:11, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a forum. Rotideypoc41352 (talk) 22:35, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Might there be Plagerism?

I recently went to the Trust No One page of the 39 Clues Wiki and found the summary there and the Trust No One section of this page to be identical. 24.14.73.183 (talk) 04:51, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, someone else has copied that portion from the The 39 Clues Wikia. It should not be a big deal, since Wikia uses GFDL. It asks for attribution, which I have just given in the last sentence. Thank you. Rotideypoc41352 (talk) 22:35, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Unstoppable book 2 and 3 title.

Is there any evidence that the book is named 'At land till sea' or even 'Run Now'? And bk 3 is 'Brace Yourself' ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.201.34.162 (talk) 05:15, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

No, and it has been removed per WP:CRYSTAL. Rotideypoc41352 (talk) 22:35, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

"Seduce"??

What's with the repeated use of "seduce" and "seducing" in this article? It appears many times in odd contexts. "You keep using that word...I do not mean what you think it means." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.178.141.76 (talk) 18:10, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism; it's been reverted. Rotideypoc41352 (talk) 22:35, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Infinity Ring?

Don't know much about this book series, but I've heard about via T39C, so I figured I'd put this here. THERE IS NO ARTICLE ON THE INFINITY RING BOOK SERIES! It has a site: www.infinityring.com, but I don't think a single Wikipedian has heard about it. It has no mention in the list of books thingamajiggys Scholastic has either. DO SOMETHING! I can't make articles since I'm not a logged in user, but it would be nice if someone else did! Thanks for reading! --188.253.146.7 (talk) 08:06, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

The better place to request articles is Articles for Creation. However, it has a huge backlog, so the wait may be a bit long. Also, the series is still very new, so I don't know if it would have reliable, third-party sources about it, which means the article maybe be deleted per WP:N. Rotideypoc41352 (talk) 22:35, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

I put in a request for it multiple times and no ones created it --72.209.53.244 (talk) 20:40, 29 June 2013 (UTC)