User:Tbrown224/sandbox

Found two articles relating to the shipping corporation Maersk. Both written by the same person. One Titled 'Maersk's new man at the top' relates to the new CEO of the company and how this new CEO will not change the way the company is run at all. The article does however do further to explain how the leading company in the shipping industry may not maintain such a high lead on its competitors because they will not be adding any new ships to there fleet.

This however contradicts the second Article titled 'Maersk orders 10 additional mega-ships' which I found that relates to the plan of Maersk having plans to build 10 new "Mega Ships" in order to stay on top of the market and deal with the Asia-Europe trade routes. This is a estimated 1.9 Billion dollar investment which wont be joining the fleet until 2013-2014. From this i can only assume that the first article I found is only considering this year when he stated that Maersk would be falling out of the lead of the industries largest company.


 * Barnard, B. (2011, Jun 27). Maersk orders 10 additional mega-ships. Journal of Commerce, pp. n/a.
 * Barnard, B. (2011, Dec 26). Maersk's new man at the top. Journal of Commerce, pp. n/a.

Articles of Interest Scurvy
 * Maersk

When comparing the article about scurvy in Oxford Encyclopedia of Maritime History to the one on the same subject in Wikipedia there are many differences. For example the Wiki article mentions that in Vitamin C the “C” stands for collagen which is not true because Vitamin C is Ascorbic Acid and is required for the biosynthesis of collagen, but is only a letter designation with no other meaning (such as Vitamin A, B, D, and E), this mistake happens early on in the introduction and is then later corrected in a different part of the article. The Encyclopedia does not mention anything about why the absence of Vitamin C does create scurvy, it only discusses that historically it has been found that the absence of it was the cause. There are also many dates and people that are in consistent between the two, the few that are consistent are Captain James Cook and French Explorer Jacques Cartier.

Most of the sources seem to follow the “Wikipedia: Identifying reliable sources” page with a few exceptions. There are books publicized by Cambridge University Press and other scholarly references. Reference which does not seem to even be sited correctly is number 12 which includes an entire sentence to explain the citation. For the most part though there are many scholarly articles which have been referenced

When you evaluate the writing style of the two documents, it is easy to tell that the wiki page was written by many different people with different levels of writing skill, while the Encyclopedia entry was written in a way which at least seemed to flow better. The benefit to the Wikipedia article is that it seems more packed full of information and with a broader range, while the Encyclopedia covers really only the basics of what should be known about the subject. In the Wikipedia article there is a lot mistakes which are better explained later on, for example the explanation how the “C” in Vitamin C stands for collagen, later on it is explained properly in the section titled “Pathogenesis”.

The Wikipedia page on scurvy has a lot of factual information in it, yet there is still a lot of things which need to be filtered out of it. Overall it has more useful information then the Encyclopedia does, but there are a lot of little errors in it that just aren’t true. In order for this article to be improved it needs to be looked over by a medical professional and a historian, together they would be able to shape all the great information given into something that lacks errors.

Draft Final Article
User:tbrown224/Article draft