User:Samuelwoodbeck/sandbox

Article Review:

The article that I looked at for my review was entitled Native American Disease and Epidemics. One of the first things that I noticed was the in depth break down/table of contents that was listed prominently shortly following a breif introduction to what the page is about. Like all well written articles, this one rely heavily upon in depth understanding of the subject and a well mapped out storyline that progressive the narrative of the event. Another thing that caught my eye was the use of visual aids. The pictures along the side, like the table of contents at the top, help to give a more crisp idea/vision of the historical event. I think that this was something that caught my eye mainly because it is something that has been lost in my writing practices through out school. I've become accustomed to relying solely upon using words to get my point across. The information is written in a way that it isn't so dense that it is inaccessible. It is written in a way that it is almost like a bridge between academic writing, and "Pop" history/academia. Wiki articles, from what I read, need to operate in a way that is cognizant of the fact that the website is accessed by people from all sort of backgrounds including education, language, etc. Moreover, the language makes it so that the article isn't solely from one perspective; it is written in a way that makes the article look as if it is riding the fence, and not taking up either side's plight. That may be a challenge as I attempt to make my own page -- walking the line between giving an unbiased narrative, versus plunging myself into the deepend of one side or the other's propaganda. The article that I looked at did an extremely good job in navigating this problem.