User:Lmefford/sandbox

Article Evaluation
John of Seville


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Everything that is currently in the article is relative to the life and work of its subject. However, there is not a whole lot of information currently presented, like a list of all the translations he worked on or possibly some more details about his life, if any are available. Outside of that, nothing is really distracting in the article itself.


 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Yes, the article in its current iteration is neutral. There currently appears to be no unsubstantiated claims or reference frames that appear biased towards any position, neutral language is maintained throughout the article.


 * Are there viewpoints that are over-represented, or under-represented?
 * Currently there are no real defined sections in this article other than just basic information and a few mentions of work performed by the subject. Therefore almost everything is under-represented about the subject. Some eventual work needs to be done to expand the information available from any viewpoint as none are currently truly presented.

listed.
 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * Of the three citations that have links, all three are functional and relate to the article. However there is quite a bit of information presented that does not have any citation currently
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * From what is currently presented in the way of references and external links, it does not appear to be fully cited necessarily. However much information still needs to be added so further expansion of the article should be able to connect each fact to a source. However, that being said the references currently used appear to be unbiased and fairly straight-forward.
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * All of the information currently present does not appear to be out of date. Quite a bit needs to be added if possible as data about his actual life is basically non-existent in the article as it is, not to mention the lack of references to all of the works he translated excluding the few references currently listed. Also more information should definitely be added concerning his impact/relationship with the Toledo School of Translators.
 * Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * So far there are not any "conversations" really, but there is a comment pointing out many of the current flaws in the article such as the lack of information and some of the structural flaws in the articles current iteration. The comment also points out that the article itself has not been majorly improved since 2016.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is currently rated as start class, and it does not currently have any ratings related to its importance. It appears to be currently classified under two projects: WikiProject Biography and WikiProject Middle Ages.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
 * Not a whole lot actually, in fact in class his life actually might have been covered even more than this article currently does. Especially when you consider how important of a translator he was for scientific works in Spain particularly his work in Toledo.

Working in Groups Part 1
 * Why did you choose it?
 * It is an article that was mentioned in lecture and it needs a lot of work.
 * What’s is missing?
 * A majority of information regarding his life and his works he translated.
 * What do you want to add?
 * All of the basic information that is missing and some additional information if possible.

[Article] Kassell, Lauren (2010) Introduction: Stars, Spirits, Signs: Towards a History of Astrology 1100--1800. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences (p. 67). http://data.isiscb.org/isis/citation/CBB000954333/

[Book] Goulding, Robert (2006) “The Secret of Secrets: The Scholarly Career of a Pseudo Aristotelian Text in the Latin Middle Ages". Lmefford (talk) 15:53, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

The topics of his translated works were mainly astrological and astronomical, philosophical and medical. At least three of his translations, the Secretum Secretorum dedicated to a Queen T[arasia?], a tract on gout offered to one of the Popes Gregory, and the original version of the 9th century Arabic philosopher Qusta ibn Luqa's De differentia spiritus et animae, were medical translations intermixed with alchemy in the Hispano-Arabic tradition. In his Book of Algorithms on Practical Arithmetic, John of Seville provides one of the earliest known descriptions of Indian positional notation, whose introduction to Europe is usually associated with the book Liber Abaci by Fibonacci:


 * “A number is a collection of units, and because the collection is infinite (for multiplication can continue indefinitely), the Indians ingeniously enclosed this infinite multiplicity within certain rules and limits so that infinity could be scientifically defined; these strict rules enabled them to pin down this subtle concept.”

John of Seville translated Al-Farghani's Kitab Usul 'ilm al-nujum(Book on the Elements of the Science of Astronomy) into Latin in 1135 ('era MCLXXIII'), as well as translating the Arab astrologer Albohali's "Book of Birth" into Latin in 1153. He also translated Kitāb taḥāwīl sinī al-‘ālam by Abu Ma'shar al-Balkhi into Latin.