User talk:MathildeG314/sandbox

Article Evaluation

The article I chose to write about is the Munich Massacre during the 1972 Olympic Games in West Germany. Given the complex nature of this conflict in the first place, this massacre exemplifies this complexity. While extremely thorough, the article was not always easy to follow for the reader, assuming he or she is completely unaware of what happened during this event. While the actual categories made sense, both chronologically and in terms of comprehension, the actual content seemed jumbled throughout. The article went back and forth flipping from Germany's irresponsibility in taking low security measures, to Palestinian brutality throughout the massacre, to empathy for the Israelis as hostages from an international perspective. The article recounts many of the world's reactions in response to this hostage crisis. It also details the specific attacks of the Israelis in their rooms and the gruesome acts committed, such as the castration. Given that the article is very comprehensive, the only recommendation would be to better organize the article so as to either chronologically explain the event more consistently or to paint the various perspectives of the event throughout the article, since that was an integral component of this article.

Because the Arab-Israeli conflict is innately biased, it is difficult to find any unbiased perspective with regards to any confrontation between both parties. The event, itself, was absolutely abhorrent; it is clear, however, that there is a clear perspective and assumption about all Palestinians that the reader is meant to elicit from this massacre. Through tone and terminology, the tone also condemns Germany for their lack of security precautions, which was an effort to have "calm" games. While the Palestinian perspective is not necessarily important to demonstrate the information of this event, it definitely lacks a presence, while the Israeli perspective seems to be more clearly represented as it attracted the sympathy of the entire world.

The article had relevant and accurate citations that were functioning and resourceful if any reader sought more information about a particular aspect of this horrendous hostage situation. The talk page mentions that this article has been noted as subject to arbitration because of its inherent bias. Otherwise, it was nominated as a "good article" though the actual results of the nominations were not disclosed. It is part of several wiki projects, eight specifically, including Palestinian, Israeli, German, and Bavarian projects. One comment made that stood out during the actual reading was the use of the word "terrorist" which does not seem objective, even though it's not wrong either. In class, we focus rather on culture, race, and sexuality rather than actual events that took place historically. I think, though, that this is a relevant topic that I always wanted to learn more about during my college career as a Middle Eastern Studies major.

MathildeG314 (talk) 02:06, 21 September 2018 (UTC)