Jump to content

Talk:History of smallpox: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 115: Line 115:


Advised IP on their talk page to use [[Template:Better source]] for specific sources. There are 181 footnotes (counting multiple references to the same sources) in the article and the vast majority, at first glance, seem to be acceptable. [[User:North Shoreman|Tom (North Shoreman)]] ([[User talk:North Shoreman|talk]]) 00:16, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
Advised IP on their talk page to use [[Template:Better source]] for specific sources. There are 181 footnotes (counting multiple references to the same sources) in the article and the vast majority, at first glance, seem to be acceptable. [[User:North Shoreman|Tom (North Shoreman)]] ([[User talk:North Shoreman|talk]]) 00:16, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

== Epidemics in the Americas ==

The first sentence reads "After first contacts with Europeans and Africans, some believe that the death of 90–95% of the native population of the New World was caused by Old World diseases" The reference is a PBS article? This seems highly dubious. There must be some better source to get better estimates from.

Revision as of 22:00, 17 August 2020

Focus

This is about the epidemiological history of the disease. It is not tasteful to paste a medical photo of the disease. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.107.189.66 (talk) 23:45, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Repeated words

In the article the words "Wiped out rural villages in successive waves." or something of the like are repeated twice. I took the liberty to delete them as it was redundent and situated too closely to sound independent of one another.GundamMerc (talk) 22:13, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Query

Copied from User talk: Wetman:

Can you list on the talk page what you edited and why? Not that there are many people on that page, but it would still be useful to know what you edited without having to look it up.GundamMerc (talk) 02:15, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I merely identified "A Spanish priest" formerly in the text as the Spanish Franciscan Motolinia and in a footnote gave the reference for the quote, which was demanded by a tagger, as quoted in Tzvetan Todorov, The Conquest of America: The Question of the Other (1999:136). I'll copy this post-and-response to Talk:History of smallpox. I got the reference through Google books.--Wetman (talk) 13:28, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for being helpful.--GundamMerc (talk) 13:36, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Now I see that we already have an article Toribio de Benavente Motolinia, author of a Historia de los Indios. Someone may want to install a link.--Wetman (talk) 16:22, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Can you do the link, i cant seem to get it to work.GundamMerc (talk) 01:43, 27 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Insert non-formatted text here

Citations: There are plenty of credible citations used in this article. However, there are a few places in the article where an addition of citations would be helpful to researchers. • Consider adding more citations in the Epidemics in the Americas section, in the parts about Hernan Cortes and the Inca people. The stories told in both are interesting but where are the sources that they came from? • There is no citation for the spread of smallpox to the thirteen colonies. Consider adding one so readers can find more information if they are interested. • Also, consider updating citation nine to a more current article or website. Although the information is still accurate, the age of the source listed may cause readers some confusion as to whether or not the information is up to date. Information Thoroughness: The information provided in this article is quite thorough in most areas. However, more information could be added in the following areas: • The section on India: How did the disease get spread there in the first place? • The Franco-Prussian War: Where was said epidemic triggered? In Prussia? What part of the war triggered it? Was it the conditions people lived in? • Japan: Where did the settlers who brought the disease come from? How did they get infected in the first place? Completeness of Information: The article covers most of the information about the progression of smallpox across the globe and the history of the spread of the disease. However, there a couple of topics that seems to be missing. • There is no information at all about the eradication of smallpox, other than the fact that it was eradicated. Consider adding more information about how humans came up with a vaccination, who developed it, how it was distributed, etc. Adding information about how smallpox outbreaks came to an end will help complete the article on the history of the disease. • Were there any outbreaks in Africa? There seems to be no information at all about smallpox in this area of the world. If there were no epidemics, why was that the case? If there were, consider adding more information about how the disease was spread and when the epidemics happened.

Charts and Graphics: The addition of a chart helps to summarize the information in that part of the article nicely. It provides a break in the reading and helps researcher by providing a timeline of information about when epidemics happened and what places were affected by them. However, a couple of additions could be made to the chart in order to improve it. • The chart provided is incomplete. The information that is provided in the chart is interesting and helpful but the blank spaces can be frustrating for a researcher who is trying to find more information on those particular topics. • The chart only includes documented smallpox epidemics in the New World. Perhaps adding similar charts in the other sections as well would help to demonstrate the history of smallpox more clearly than just one chart that starts in the middle the progression of smallpox across the globe. • There are no graphics that go with this article. An idea would be to add a map of the world perhaps, colour coded to show visually how smallpox spread across the globe throughout the centuries; which areas of the world were in an epidemic and when. • A bar graph showing percentage of population infected, deceased due to smallpox, and uninfected in a certain population may also be an interesting idea for a graphic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ddabell (talk • contribs) 22:08, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I added a section of epidemics in Africa as there was no information on that currently and started a new section on the history of variolation or inoculation of smallpox. --ddabell (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.183.170.91 (talk) 17:09, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

History 208 Review

The article begins with an informative introduction to lead the article. Clear headings are provided for each of the sections which provide an organized structure throughout the article. References are provided in the article with no missing citations. The background information on the various epidemics is detailed and thorough. The chart provided in the article is clear and improves the article by providing a visual. The heading of “Australasian epidemics” is confusing. Is it meant to say Australian? There is also an additional heading of “Erradication” yet nothing appears underneath this heading, making the article seem incomplete. The article includes pictures within the text creating a better looking article. Overall, the article is organized well and is objective towards the information of the topic. The information in the article is accurate as well as relevant to the topic. The article includes a good quality of writing and is easy for the reader to follow. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rcoutts12 (talk • contribs) 02:36, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]


The information and the history of inoculation were very interesting. Was there any particular reason for the boys to be inoculated in a different nostril than the girls? In the second paragraph about Mary, I was just wondering who Job was and his tribulations. There were a couple typos but very few and very far between. The information provided was relevant to the topic and is accurate. This article was well done and very informative. It was really interesting to see the similarities between cowpox and smallpox and how each was used in the inoculation process. The article was well done and had a good flow to it. Krcountrygirl (talk) 03:27, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant articles on variolation/inoculation

There appear to be several articles dealing with variolation/inoculation, with some identical text or different text treating the identical subject matter:

The first two should should be combined in some way, with the orphan article deleted (after moving any unique content from it into the combined format.

Somewhat less redundant, but also overlapping in content, are:

Mathglot (talk) 22:35, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have commented here. Graham Colm (talk) 23:27, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. As a new user, I'm certainly frustrated that the discussion of this subject is split between two parallel articles. I understand that the original idea was to have Variolation to be the narrow article on smallpox only, and Inoculation be the broad article describing other uses of the technique (see this discussion) but it seems like that goal was not achieved. I believe that we should either merge these two articles, integrating the content, or enforce the split as originally envisioned. Either way, the history of the smallpox technique should be in one article, with appropriate summary and links in other articles. Hi-storian (talk) 19:33, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on History of smallpox. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:41, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on History of smallpox. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:42, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

I reverted an IP's tagging of the entire article for bad sources based on what appears to be a single paragraph further down in the article. A better alternative, if this is a serious effort and not just vandalism, would be to tag the individual sources that are in question with an explanation of why they are problematic. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 14:50, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Advised IP on their talk page to use Template:Better source for specific sources. There are 181 footnotes (counting multiple references to the same sources) in the article and the vast majority, at first glance, seem to be acceptable. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 00:16, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Epidemics in the Americas

The first sentence reads "After first contacts with Europeans and Africans, some believe that the death of 90–95% of the native population of the New World was caused by Old World diseases" The reference is a PBS article? This seems highly dubious. There must be some better source to get better estimates from.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:History_of_smallpox&oldid=973556914"