User:Berns6/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1

 * Article title
 * Battle of Tettenhall


 * Article Evaluation
 * The whole article is only about 200 words, and within those its split up into the background, the battle, and the aftermath. But there's a major lack of details on each section like where was the battle? what changes did it bring about? how did the siblings become in charge? There's so much that could be added in. There was only the use of one source and it wasn't the Saxon chronicle itself even.


 * Sources
 * only 1, "A famous result leaving Denmark down and out" More sources are needed

Option 2

 * Article title
 * Humbert V de Beaujeu


 * Article Evaluation
 * This man was second in command to King Louis IX during the Albigensian Crusade. The article is about 150 words of about the shortest summary of who he was. Briefly mentioning his wife and kids, and what he did overall in the crusade. It leaves out any details about how he rose to his standing, his death, his personality, Being basically the kings right hand man during this important time in Christianity there is definitely more out there about this guy.


 * Sources
 * The 3 sources listed are all in french and I can't read french. However they are all published articles and should have some credibility.

Option 3

 * Article title
 * Medieval archaeology


 * Article Evaluation
 * This article has 4 sections, castles, rural landscapes, towns, and churches. Each section only gives a brief description of how they worked in the middle ages but no examples of famous ones for reference. No idea on the building style or materials used. Archaeology is a way of expressing culture and it is a great way of understating how and why people lived the way they did. There is much to add if we wanted to understand the whys to their archaeology
 * Sources
 * there are 6 sources, half of which all come from Gilchrist, R, who is described as a novelist, not a historian. These sources are more bias and used to entertain rather then inform. There are 100s of sources about the architecture of this time which could help improve this.

Option 4

 * Article title
 * Fall of Arsuf


 * Article Evaluation
 * This is another very short only like 150 word article. It gives no context on why the Knights were in Arsuf in the first place trying to defend from the Muslim invaders. It doesn't talk about how the city was defended strategically, or give us any background into the people involved on either side. It doesn't mention any of the siege tactics used to sack the city as well,


 * Sources
 * the only source when i looked it up was described as conventional designation of the anonymous 14th-century historian. This doesn't give it much credibility if any.

Option 5

 * Article title
 * Medieval architecture


 * Article Evaluation
 * This article has some highs and lows. It does a good job talking about the styles of architecture but it lacks information with the types. It is also faily vague and just gives an overall idea of the architecture not an in depth analysis like we love. By adding more details about how the architecture impacted culture this article can be saved.


 * Sources
 * 3 of the sources come from the same guys which is a red flag, but they are all scholarly articles.