User:Zach Lienemann/sandbox

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: Mariner's Astrolabe
 * Briefly describe why you have chosen this article to evaluate: I have chosen to evaluate this article because It relates to history of science, and is a article related to an activity from class.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?: yes
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?: No
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? Yes (It says instrument was called a ring, but nowhere else in the article does it say this specifically.)
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? It is consise

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic? yes
 * Is the content up-to-date? yes
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? no
 * Does the article deal with one of Wikipedia's equity gaps? Does it address topics related to historically underrepresented populations or topics? no

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral? yes
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? no
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? I don't know. I don't think so.
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? no

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? No
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? yes
 * Are the sources current? yes
 * Are the sources written by a diverse spectrum of authors? Do they include historically marginalized individuals where possible? I don't know.
 * Check a few links. Do they work? Yes/ lots of books cited.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? Yes
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors? Yes/ fixed one
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Yes. History -> Construction -> Limitations

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes
 * Are images well-captioned? Yes, all but one.
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? I think so.
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? Could use work.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? Lots of talk about sources. Some talk on Disputable claims.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? It is rated start-class / bottom importance in Wiki-project Astronomy.
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? No.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status? Still in start class, needs fleshing out.
 * What are the article's strengths? Lots of pictures is definitely a plus.
 * How can the article be improved? Article can be improved with a "usage" section
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed? I would say that this article is underdeveloped.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback:

The Years After 1824
In the years after the pandemic subsided in many areas of the world, there were still small outbreaks and pockets of cholera remained. In the period from 1823 to 1829, the first cholera outbreak remained outside of much of Europe. It's spread into Europe in the years after the initial outbreak started with the spread of the bacterium to the Russian empire yet again. Historians theorize that the spread back into Europe was largely to due to it's movement in the Russian river system. This movement of the virus in the rivers of Russia allowed cholera to reach England by 1832, and the Americas shortly afterword. Special deputations from the west traveled to Russia to observe the Russian response and formulate a plan to deal with these pocketed outbreaks. Reports from this committee of scientists were bleak, with one Dr. Rauch proclaiming that, "the cholera will not be cured by nature's powers alone without the help of art...". The conclusion of Dr. Rauch's findings was that no one standardized method was the key to controlling an outbreak. By 1835. these pockets of the bacterium claimed hundreds of thousands of lives and had left it's painful mark. Zach Lienemann (talk) 16:47, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Origin and initial spread
'''The name Cholera had been used in previous centuries to describe illnesses involving nausea and vomiting. Today, cholera specifically describes illness caused by the Vibrio cholerae bacteria. There are numerous examples of epidemics prior to 1817 which are suspected as being cholera. In the sixth century BCE cholera-like symptoms were described by an Indian text. In the 16th century, an outbreak of acute diarrhea was reported to have occurred in the East Indies by the Dutch. A similar outbreak was recorded in 1669 in China. However, there is not evidence of "true Asiatic Cholera" prior to 1781, in which the first well-documented epidemic occurred. Having begun in southern India, it would later spread to eastern India and eventually Sri Lanka.''' Cholera was endemic to the lower Ganges River. At festival times, pilgrims frequently contracted the disease there and carried it back to other parts of India on their returns, where it would spread, then subside. The first cholera pandemic started similarly, as an outbreak that was suspected to have begun in 1817 in the town of Jessore. Some epidemiologists and medical historians have suggested that it spread globally through a Hindu pilgrimage, the Kumbh Mela, on the upper Ganges River. Earlier outbreaks of cholera had occurred near Purnia in Bihar, but scholars think these were independent events. In 1817, cholera began spreading outside the Ganges Delta. By September 1817, the disease had reached Calcutta on the Bay of Bengal and quickly spread to the rest of the subcontinent. By 1818 the disease broke out in Bombay, on the west coast. LucioFulci (talk) 16:51, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Note: Bolded text = new additions, non-bold = part of the original article

Racism and xenophobia
According to history professor Samuel Kohn, epidemics in antiquity often brought people of a society together. However, some diseases such as cholera produced rather the opposite, triggering blame and even violence. Often times, fear of cholera outbreaks would lead to increased racial tensions. The cholera pandemic's origin in India led to a rise in anti-Asian sentiment, especially towards Indian people and culture, in the West during the initial outbreak and following more outbreaks decades later. The disease was subsequently associated with Asia and South Asia, in particular, was seen as in some way to blame for cholera. Derision towards Indian cultural practices, especially Hindu pilgrimages, and hygiene following the initial outbreak were reported. Speaking about the anti-Asian sentiment that rose after the outbreak, British historian David Arnold said, "The Indian origins of cholera and its almost global dissemination from Bengal made the disease a convenient symbol for much that the west feared or despised about a society so different from its own". Medical professionals of the time were also noted for relying on moral judgments and generalisations of Indian people on pilgrimages. The sanitary commissioner of Bengal in British India, Dr. David Smith said, "the human mind can scarcely sink lower than it has done in connection with the appalling degeneration of idol-worship at Pooree". During the outbreak, British authorities launched inquiries into the conditions of South Asian people on pilgrimages and eventually classified pilgrims as a "dangerous class" who were placed under surveillance. Historian Christopher Hamlin compared the quarantine of Muslim pilgrims to concentration camps, and states that cholera led to an increase in authoritarianism which saw the suspension of civil rights due to fear of the disease. LucioFulci (talk) 00:54, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Spread beyond India
After spreading beyond India, the first cholera pandemic hit other parts of Asia and the African coast the hardest. It would not be until later epidemics of cholera that it would ravage Europe and the Americas. In March 1820, the disease was identified in Siam, in May 1820 it had spread as far as Bangkok and Manila, in spring of 1821 it reached Java, Oman, and Anhai in China; in 1822 it was found in Japan, in the Persian Gulf, in Baghdad, in Syria, and in the Transcaucasus; and in 1823 cholera reached Astrakhan, Zanzibar, and Mauritius.

...

The spread of the first cholera pandemic was closely linked to warfare and trade. Navy and merchant ships carried people with the disease to the shores of the Indian Ocean, from Africa to Indonesia, and north to China and Japan. During the Ottoman-Persian War of 1821-1823, cholera would affect both armies in what is modern-day Armenia. Hindu pilgrims carried cholera within the subcontinent, as had happened many times previously, but British troops carried it overland to Nepal and Afghanistan. In 1821, British troops brought the disease to Oman from India.

Note: I underlined portions that were already in the article, but which I moved around in the article to make it make more sense and read better. I also removed one sentence I felt was redundant and had no source. LucioFulci (talk) 00:54, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Peer Review
'''Do well? Impressed me? Described subject in clear way?'''

The addition you added to the origin and original spread flows nicely into the section from the article.

What changes suggest to improve?

The sentence “Historian theorize that the spread back into Europe was largely to do to it’s movement…” has wording that I find confusing, I would suggest reading it out loud and trying to determine a way that to do toit’s movement would sound more clear. I would suggest putting the years after 1824 at the end of the article if you don’t already plan to do so.

Most important thing to improve the article?

The section on racism and xenophobia feels a little out of place. I think an important thing to improve this section of the acrticle would be to add more or explain things in this section more clearly.

Anything applicable to my own article?

The section years after 1824 is something I can apply to my own article addition by using the informatio from your addition and sources to add information to the Chlorea section of the article I am updating.

Response To Peer Review
I agree that the quote's wording sounds out of place. I will edit that part to make it flow more easily. The problem is that it is a direct quote from the text, so there is not much leeway in editing the quote itself. I think that the section of the quote where it talks about "art" is explaind in the context of the second sentence. "Art" has meaning that no one method would directly apply to controlling the outbreak. I appreciate your kind words about the origin and original spread. Zach Lienemann (talk) 16:32, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

The peer reviewer mentioned that the section in the original article regarding racism and xenophobia as a result of the cholera pandemic was lacking or felt out of place. Although we have not made changes to this section yet, I agree with their assessment that it could be improved by being expanded upon. I don’t necessarily agree that it’s “out of place”, but perhaps the section itself could be moved to make it feel more logical. We have curated a source “Pandemics: waves of disease, waves of hate from the Plague of Athens to A.I.D.S.” which I think will allow us to give more detail to that section. Perhaps we could find more sources however, since this particular article does not focus on cholera but instead gives a broad overview of the effects of pandemics on hate in a general sense. LucioFulci (talk) 16:35, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Spread beyond India
When the epidemic reached Russia and specifically Astrakhan, their response was to formulate an anti-Cholera program in 1823. This program was headed by a German physician by the name of Dr. Rehmann. The Anti-Cholera program inspired the creation of a medical-administration board by Tsar Alexander I that inspired similar medical administration across Europe.

Formal Citations
Echenberg, M. J. (2011). Africa in the time of cholera: A history of pandemics from 1817 to the present. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

McGREW, R. E. “THE FIRST CHOLERA EPIDEMIC AND SOCIAL HISTORY.” Bulletin of the History of Medicine, vol. 34, no. 1, 1960, pp. 61–73. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/44446659. Accessed 2 Oct. 2020.

Selwyn, S. “Cholera old and new.” Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine vol. 70,5 (1977): 301-2.

Cohn, Samuel K. “Pandemics: Waves of Disease, Waves of Hate from the Plague of Athens to A.I.D.S.* Pandemics: Waves of Disease, Waves of Hate from the Plague of Athens to A.I.D.S.” Historical Research, vol. 85, no. 230, Nov. 2012, pp. 535–555. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1111/j.1468-2281.2012.00603.x.

Yurtoğlu, Nadir. “Http%3a%2f%2fwww.Historystudies.net%2fdergi%2f%2fbirinci-Dunya-Savasinda-Bir-Asayis-Sorunu-Sebinkarahisar-Ermeni-isyani20181092a4a8f.Pdf.” History Studies International Journal of History, vol. 10, no. 7, 2018, pp. 241–264., doi:10.9737/hist.2018.658.