1. The article is 2837 words.
2. The Search term I used was Bartholomew’s Massacre and the exact title is “ St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre”
3. The disambiguation link brought me back to the exact same article.
4. In the discussion box there are a couple comments complaining about this article being biased and not using proper information to describe the Massacre. They say that the article is based on fantasy instead of facts. They also mentioned that the most recent edits are partisan.
5. In the History of the article I found that there were at least 500 changes, the earliest was on 12/30/2002 and the latest on 9/8/2008.
6. There are 3 external links provided.
7. There are 10 references.
8. There is one entry on further reading.
This article talks about the horrible massacre that happen in France (starting in Paris) because of the conflicts between the Roman Catholic Church and the Huguenots (the French Calvinist Protestants). It first gives some background information on why this Massacre happened. The main reasons were the end of the Third War of Religion, the marriage between Henry III of Navarre and Marguerite of Valois and attempt to murder the Admiral of Coligny.
This article then narrates how the massacres happened and the parts of France were they took place. Then it gives us some detail of the reactions and what happened after the massacres.
When I first read this article I thought it had good information, but after reading the Discussion in made me realize that it is indeed biased. I would recommend reading it to see one side of the story, but I would definitely encourage the reader to further investigate the other side of the story.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Interesting what you note about Wikipedia. I have an ongoing debate with my family: I use Wikipedia all the time. Certain family members don't trust it. I find that if the material is "iffy" they let you know. I've seen the "possible bias" or insufficient reference warnings, so I know that if I'm using the info at that point, it's risky. On the other hand, when the warnings aren't there, the information seems to be right on.
Post a Comment