User:ShelbyMcEachern/sandbox

Section One
This is text under heading one.

Section Two
This is text under heading two.

italics bold

Shin Megami Tensei: Persona 4

Shelby's tumblr


 * Bullet 1
 * Bullet 2
 * Bullet 2.2


 * 1) Number 1
 * 2) Number 1.1
 * 3) Number 2

Description
This is my Wikipedia Assignment in which I will compare three articles from Wikipedia to another encyclopedia site. The site I am using is Britannica Online. The three articles I picked to compare are Joan of Arc, Ancient Egypt and Middle Ages.

The first article I will be comparing is the Joan of Arc article. For the Joan of Arc article, both sites have it divided into stages. However, for wikipedia, one of the sections have sub-sections of some important time line events. But then the major ones get their own section for after the timeline. In Britannica Online, they have sections as well. But each is it's own heading according to that time period for Joan of Arc. So it does not go off in a tangent like Wikipedia does. The reason why I chose Joan of Arc as one of the things to compare is because she was my favorite historical figure in the Middle Ages with religion.

The second article I will be comparing is the Ancient Egypt article. For the Ancient Egypt article on Wikipedia, I notice that for each period heading, they link it to an article about that time period and only briefly describe it. In my opinion, it is not necessary to have them all as separate pages. They should all be on the Ancient Egypt page. However, on the Britannica Online page, not only do they go into details about the time periods and lifestyle of Ancient Egypt, they even have a section of how the study of Ancient Egypt began and who was involved in it. The reason why I chose Ancient Egypt as one of the things to compare is because of the time period just fascinates me. It is my favorite time period Before Christ.

The last article I will be comparing is the Middles Ages article. For the Middle Ages article on Wikipedia, I notice that they branch out into Early Middle Ages, High Middles Ages, and Late Middle Ages with each sub heading in each of them. However, like the Ancient Egypt article, they link it to another main article and then briefly describe it there. This is not necessary in my opinion. In the Britannica Online page for the Middle Ages, they do link a page to the History of the Middle Ages in Europe. But they sum up the important parts of the Middle Ages there on the article.

Articles I am comparing
Joan of Arc

Ancient Egypt

Middle Ages

Description
This is my second Wikipedia Assignment in which I will compare one of the articles I picked in Assignment #1 to another encyclopedia site. The site I am using is Britannica Online. The article I am picking is Joan of Arc.

Wikipedia Article: Joan of Arc
The Joan of Arc article for Wikipedia is long. There is a brief introduction of the article followed by a box for the topics included in the Wikipedia article. The topics for the article are Background, Life, Posthumous events, Canonization, Legacy, Visions, Alleged relics dis proven, and Revisionist theories. For Life and Posthumous events, there are sub-topics. The sub-topics for Life are Rise, Leadership, Capture, Trial, and Execution. For Posthumous events, the sub-topic is Retrial. They also have some pictures in the article to show some things from her timeline.

There is a see more list of all of the Wikipedia articles that are related to Joan of Arc listed in the article. This could be helpful if people want to read up on the people and places mentioned in the Joan of Arc article. This article has 87 foot notes but only five references.

Britannica Article: Saint Joan Of Arc
The article about Joan Of Arc on Britannica seems a lot more structured than Wikipedia's article. It mentions the primary contributors and even links to their pages to prove their credibility. Unlike Wikipedia, Britannica does not have too many pictures for the article about Joan of Arc. It does have topics and sub-topics but not in a side bar to click on to get to like Wikipedia does and they are laid out differently. The topics for the article are Joan's Mission, Capture,Trial and Execution, and Character and Importance. Joan's Mission and Capture,Trial and Execution have sub-topics as well. The sub-topics for Joan's Mission are Action at Orléans, Victories and coronation, Ambitions for Paris, and Further struggle. For Capture,Trial and Execution, the sub-topics are The Trial, and Abjuration, relapse, and execution.

Comparison between the Wikipedia Article and the Britannica Article
When going through both articles with a quick glance, you do not see much of a difference except Wikipedia having more pictures. However, when you go through each of the articles in details, you do see more differences then just the amount of pictures. Although they speak of the same information, Wikipedia explains the stuff in a more simple language. An example of this is: "The Hundred Years' War continued for twenty-two years after her death. Charles VII succeeded in retaining legitimacy as the king of France in spite of a rival coronation held for Henry VI in December 1431 on the boy's tenth birthday. Before England could rebuild its military leadership and force of longbowmen, lost in 1429, the country lost its alliance with Burgundy at the Treaty of Arras in 1435. The Duke of Bedford died the same year and Henry VI became the youngest king of England to rule without a regent; his weak leadership was probably the most important factor in ending the conflict. Kelly DeVries argues that Joan of Arc's aggressive use of artillery and frontal assaults influenced French tactics for the rest of the war."

Britannica, however, explains things in a more scholarly manner. An example of this is: "Joan was the daughter of a tenant farmer at Domrémy, on the borders of the duchies of Bar and Lorraine. In her mission of expelling the English and their Burgundian allies from the Valois kingdom of France, she felt herself to be guided by the “voices” of St. Michael, St. Catherine, and St. Margaret. She possessed many attributes characteristic of the female visionaries who were a noted feature of her time. These qualities included extreme personal piety, a claim to direct communication with the saints, and a consequent reliance upon individual experience of God’s presence beyond the ministrations of the priesthood and the confines of the institutional church. But to these were added remarkable mental and physical courage, as well as a robust common sense. Known as La Pucelle, or the Maid of Orléans, Joan became in the following centuries a focus of unity for the French people, especially at times of crisis."

The last difference between the two articles is that Wikipedia has another page in certain sections for more details of the certain event while Britannica does not.

In my personal opinion, after carefully reading through the articles, I feel like Britannica would be a more credited source instead of Wikipedia.

Contributors
With Wikipedia, as long as you have access to an internet, you can contribute to the article. It does not matter about your credibility. With Britannica however, the two main contributors of the article have links to their page. In fact, Malcolm is a Fellow and Tutor in History, St. John's College, Oxford, and a Lecturer in Modern History, University of Oxford. Author of War and Chivalry and others. Malcolm is in the History field and therefore, has valid credibility.

Assessment of the Two Joan Of Arc Articles
Wikipedia sometimes has unnecessary extra pages that is related to the article. For example, in the Retrial sub-topic, there is a page called Retrial of Joan of Arc. Why would they need an extra page on that when they already have a sub-topic of that in the Joan of Arc article itself? The answer is, they would not need such a thing. The reason being is that there is already a sub-topic about the Retrial of Joan of Arc right in the Joan of Arc Article. However, some article links are necessary. An example of this is that there is a page called Siege of Orléans in the Rise section. It is necessary because then it would give more information about that event that happened in the Rise section since it was not only Joan of Arc who participated in that. I feel like Wikipedia overloads the article with pictures too.

Britannica has everything related to purely Joan of Arc in it's one article. It does not have any unnecessary extra pages. It is not as crowded with pictures as Wikipedia is. It is also written by two people who have a lot of credibility. The Article is even listed in the "Encyclopædia Britannica Profiles 300 Women Who Changed the World" Spotlight page on Britannica. The Wikipedia page has nothing like that for Joan Of Arc.

So in conclusion, I would like to say that I personally think that the Britannica Article for Joan of Arc is more credible.

Additional Resources

 * 1) Fraioli, Deborah A. Joan Of Arc : The Early Debate. Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK: Boydell Press, 2000. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 10 Nov. 2013.
 * 2) Taylor, Larissa Juliet. "Joan of Arc, the church, and the papacy, 1429-1920." The Catholic Historical Review 98.2 (2012): 217+. Academic OneFile. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.
 * 3) Charlier, P., et al. "The 'relics of Joan of Arc': a forensic multidisciplinary analysis." Forensic Science International 194.1-3 (2010): e9-e15. Academic OneFile. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.
 * 4) Warren, Patricia Nell. "Was Joan of Arc genetically male?" The Gay & Lesbian Review Worldwide 16.1 (2009): 24+. Academic OneFile. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.
 * 5) "Joan of Arc tests." History Today 56.4 (2006): 9. Academic OneFile. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.
 * 6) Peters, Julie Stone. "Joan of Arc internationale: Shaw, Brecht, and the law of nations." Comparative Drama 38.4 (2004): 355+. Academic OneFile. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.
 * 7) FREEMAN, JAMES A. "JoaElliott, Dyan. "Seeing Double: John Gerson, The Discernment Of Spirits, And Joan Of Arc." American Historical Review 107.1 (2002): 26. Academic Search Complete. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.n Of Arc: Soldier, Saint, Symbol—Of What?." Journal Of Popular Culture 41.4 (2008): 601-634. Academic Search Complete. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.
 * 8) d’Orsi, Giuseppe, and Paolo Tinuper. "“I Heard Voices…”: From Semiology, A Historical Review, And A New Hypothesis On The Presumed Epilepsy Of Joan Of Arc." Epilepsy & Behavior 9.1 (2006): 152-157. Academic Search Complete. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.
 * 9) Sullivan, Winnifred Fallers. "Joan's Two Bodies: A Study In Political Anthropology." Social Research 78.2 (2011): 307-324. Academic Search Complete. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.
 * 10) höpflinger, anna-katharina. "She Even Carried Weapons": Clothing, Religion And Identity." Material Religion 6.3 (2010): 374-376. Academic Search Complete. Web. 10 Nov. 2013.