User:Sessamo/sandbox

Wikipedia Articles
The French Revolution


 * Wikipedia contributors. "French Revolution." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 30 Sep. 2014. Web. 30 Sep. 2014.

Abortion


 * Wikipedia contributors. "Abortion." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 3 Sep. 2014. Web. 30 Sep. 2014.

Anonymous (group)


 * Wikipedia contributors. "Anonymous (group)." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 29 Sep. 2014. Web. 30 Sep. 2014.

Capital Punishment


 * Wikipedia contributors. "Capital punishment." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 27 Sep. 2014. Web. 30 Sep. 2014.

Outside Articles
The French Revolution


 * "French Revolution." International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. 2008. Web. 30 Sep. 2014

Abortion


 * Long, Linda. "Abortion". The Canadian Encyclopedia. Toronto: Historical Canada, 2006. Web. 7 February 2006.

Anonymous


 * "anonymous." The Oxford Pocket Dictionary of Current English. 2009. Web. Retrieved September 30, 2014.

Capital Punishment


 * "Capital Punishment." International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. 1968. Web. 30 Sep. 2014.

Thought Process
For my articles chosen in assignment 1, I wanted to really highlight the differences between Wikipedia and other various forms of online encyclopedias. I wanted to show when traditional encyclopedias are a strong choice, and when Wikipedia is the better choice and what exactly it brings to the table in terms of a research advantage.

For my basic article comparison, I chose the French Revolution because I wanted to really establish an apples-to-apples comparison of Wikipedia and another encyclopedic source. I thought the French Revolution would make an excellent comparison because both articles are considerable in length and a great deal of the information contained in both would be simple to compare. As long as dates, figures and timelines matched up in a similar fashion I felt this would show Wikipedia can stand on it's own as a simple historical reference source.

Abortion and Capital Punishment occupy a similar space in my mind: both are extremely sensitive social topics that often leave people divided and feature evolving and complex histories. I thought this would make another excellent comparison between the capabilities of Wikipedia and a traditional source and would especially highlight Wikipedia's strength as a sort of nexus of information, showing the immense research benefit of having such a giant collection of hyperlinks in an article.

Finally I chose Anonymous simply as a way of highlighting the real monopoly Wikipedia has on the field of social terms and modern colloquialisms. In most other online encyclopedias I consulted, a search for "anonymous" was met with a verbatim definition of the word. Only Wikipedia featured an article on the incredibly influential activism group that has existed for several years in public spotlight.

Wikipedia Article
The Wikipedia article on abortion is incredibly comprehensive. It covers practically every aspect of abortion from the definition of it, to the various medical methods used in causing an abortion and the various medical time lines that dictate when to use them, and the possible illegal and unsafe medical improvisation methods women sometimes resort to. Wikipedia also dedicates extensive coverage to the various social and legal challenges that women face surrounding abortion. It covers the basic legal history that lead to the legalization of abortion in many countries, to various modern and social challenges that abortion still faces today from various groups, including anti-abortion violence that targets both women and their healthcare providers.

While the Canadian Encyclopedia article uses specifics to discuss the history of abortion in Canada, the Wikipedia article is incredibly well connected. It features extensive hyperlinks to practically every section or aspect of the article. In addition, the Wikipedia article also dedicates extensive time to the medical aspect of abortion. It explains various medical avenues of abortion, and the rationale for using the various methods.

The references and further readings provided for the Wikipedia article are extremely expansive. They cover basically every idea touched on by the article and the end result is an amazing 172 links to outside websites or articles. There are links to research articles, abortion statistics compiled by governmental organizations, and various reports done by the World Health Organization.

Canadian Encyclopedia
By contrast, the article in the Canadian Encyclopedia is brief and narrow, while thorough. It focuses entirely on the history of abortion in Canada and the legal challenges it faces, with extremely little mention given to abortion outside of Canada or the social aspects of abortion.

On the subject of abortion access in Canada, the entry in the Canadian Encyclopedia is the clear winner. The Wikipedia article is incredibly broad, but does not touch on the specifics of abortion access in relation to a specific country. This makes the two different articles very useful for very different and specific purposes.

The Canadian Encyclopedia article is extremely bare bones in both references and future readings. The only related articles provided are on the Supreme Court of Canada, no outside references are made during the article itself, and the author herself has no visible credentials displayed.

Discussion and comparison of the two articles
These articles are both useful in their respective purposes, and it is apparent that each article was written for a very different purpose and for a different level of audience.

The Wikipedia article on abortion is an intimidating piece of writing. It covers the scientific and legal aspect of abortion in extreme detail. With more than 170 outside links or references, the article is not wanting for substance or for further readings. It handles abortion as the great hydra of social topics that it is, explaining the complicated nature of abortion from a historic perspective, a legal perspective, and a medical perspective. It also dedicates an extremely large section to explaining the various different push backs abortion legalization and procedure has encountered. From explaining the cultural reasons why people protest abortions, to examining the legal methods used to undermine abortion systems and the sociological weapons used to target the women and healthcare providers involved in abortion.

The abortion article in the Canadian Encyclopedia is a much simpler, and extremely specific piece of writing, As I have already outlined above, between both it's lack of outside links and further readings, it takes an extremely simple outline of a very complex topic. It focuses mostly on the history of abortion legalization in Canada, mentions in brief that it's still a contested topic, and links only to a general article on the Supreme Court of Canada.

Further Readings
Avalos, Lisa. "Hindsight And The Abortion Experience: What Abortion Means To Women Years Later." Gender Issues: 35-57. Print.

Berlatsky, Noah. Abortion. Detroit, MI: Greenhaven, 2011. Print.

Caudill, Steven B., and Franklin G. Mixon. "Anti-Abortion Activities And The Market For Abortion Services: Protest As A Disincentive." American Journal of Economics and Sociology: 463-85. Print.

Currie, Stephen. Abortion. San Diego, Calif.: Greenhaven, 2000. Print.

Jhappan, Radha. Women's Legal Strategies in Canada. Toronto, Ont.: U of Toronto, 2002. Print.

Lehfeldt, Hans. "Abortion and Abortion Laws Today∗." Journal of Sex Research: 167-69. Print.

Medoff, Marshall H. "State Abortion Policies, Targeted Regulation Of Abortion Provider Laws, And Abortion Demand." Review of Policy Research: 577-94. Print.

Oakley, Maureen Rand. "Abortion Restrictions And Abortion Rates: Has State Abortion Policy Been Successful?" Politics &amp; Policy: 472-87. Print.

Richer, Karine. Abortion in Canada Twenty Years after R. v. Morgentaler. Ottawa: Parliamentary Information and Research Service, 2008. Print.

"U.S. Courts Strike Down Restrictive Abortion Laws, British Nurses Ask Special Hospital Abortion Units." AJN, American Journal of Nursing: 867-69. Print.