Talk:Black Death

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Black Death was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
June 21, 2005 Peer review Reviewed
December 15, 2005 Good article nominee Listed
January 11, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted
Current status: Delisted good article
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Medicine (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Note icon
This article was selected on the Medicine portal as one of Wikipedia's best articles related to Medicine.
WikiProject Middle Ages (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject European history (Rated B-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Death (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Discrimination (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
 
WikiProject Jewish history (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject History (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Economics (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.5 / Vital (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
C-Class article C  Quality: C-Class
Checklist icon
 ???  Importance: not yet rated

Black Plague[edit]

Already links here and is supported by the title of one of the sources. Needs mention in the lead. — LlywelynII 10:13, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

No scholar calls it the Black Plague and that is not a reliable source.--SabreBD (talk) 10:17, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
You're lying or misinformed. You shouldn't be so rude regardless, but it's especially offputting when you're completely wrong. "Black Plague" is less common but it's certainly common enough that it bears mention here, doubly so in light of the redirect being used by scores of pages. — LlywelynII 10:23, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
Sourcing in the lead falls under WP:BLUE in my mind but you're welcome to pick any of the 6700 sources at Google Scholar that you feel meet your criteria for inclusion. I'm not interested in batting back and forth, just providing helpful and necessary information and improving our coverage of a common term. If there are caveats on its use, open up a name section and discuss them. — LlywelynII 10:26, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
Ah. There is a name section already; it's just mislabeled. Fine to mention it there as well, but the alt names need bolding. — LlywelynII 10:31, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
I am going to assume you are going for an odd form sort of irony with your personal comments and ignore them. Whether this needs to be in the opening sentence is clearly under dispute and I am reverting under WP:BRD. We now need to sort it out here. As for your list of sources. It is clear that the vast majority of your 6,700 sources are not about this historic event, but apparently about subjects such as circuits and golf. I reiterate, this is the not the scholarly name for this phenomenon. I suggest we see what other editors say and then see if we can gain a consensus.--SabreBD (talk) 16:33, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
I just got through mentioning "Black Plague" in a different discussion and am surprised that the article is not called Black Plague and that, since it's not called that, the term is not at least mentioned in the lead. "Black Plague" is a significant alternative term for this topic, and is used by a number of scholars, as sources in the article show and as pointed to by Sabrebd LlywelynII above. So, per the WP:Alternative name policy, it should be noted in the lead. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 03:01, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
'Black Plague' is not a name commonly used for the pestilence. Searching the internet for it comes up with two board games, a pop group and other irrelevant activities. The statement by Flyer22Reborn "is used by a number of scholars, as sources in the article show" is clearly untrue. Only one source of the many in the article uses that name. It is not a significant alternative name for the topic. Apuldram (talk) 11:38, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
Searching the Internet for "Black plague" brings up more than just "two board games, a pop group and other irrelevant activities" if one looks beyond the junk. If one actually looks, including on YouTube, or has read any of the literature, there are clearly a number of scholars who use the terms black plague, plague, bubonic plague and black death interchangeably. For example, although Norman F. Cantor uses Black Death for his 2001 book In the Wake of the Plague: The Black Death and the World it Made, from Simon and Schuster, he also calls it "black plague," stating, "Much of what we know about the greatest medical disaster ever, the Black Plague of the fourteenth century, is wrong." If we look at the 2001 Encyclopedia of Women in the Middle Ages source, by author Jennifer Lawler, published by McFarland, Lawler states on page 124, "The worst disaster of the Middle Ages was not a war nor a storm. It was a sickness called the black plague. This disease was also known as the bubonic plague since it left sores called buboes, or the black death, because of the color of the sores it caused." Since Lawler is a freelance writer, though, some might state that calling her a scholar on this topic is questionable. Either way, the alternative names black plague and bubonic plague are nowhere in the lead or the Names section. In fact, many sources state "Black Death, also known as Bubonic Plague," and yet this article does not even note "bubonic plague" as an alternative name. "Bubonic plague" is mentioned in the "Causes" section, though. That we have a Bubonic plague article doesn't mean we shouldn't mention the term Bubonic plague as an alternative name. And we certainly shouldn't be confusing readers by having black plague redirect here and not even mentioning it in the lead or lower in the article. Maybe this is a regional and/or generational thing; by that, I mean here in the United States, the Plague was mostly called "the Black plague" when I was in school; the text looked a lot like this Reading source (from Remedia Publications) when I was in elementary school or middle school. So I agree with LlywelynII that "Black Plague is less common but it's certainly common enough that it bears mention here, doubly so in light of the redirect being used by scores of pages." It should at least be in the Names section. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:24, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
You're not wrong and thank you for being so very thorough in your discussion. I'm restoring the term to the lead sentence but otherwise leaving this mess alone. If the well-meaning but (in this case) underinformed editors above remove the term without further discussion and thorough scholarly explanation for how it is misleading to mention this alternative name, kindly restore it. If they keep it up beyond that, I guess we can start RfDs and the rest of that nonsense. I don't know why it's so hard for them to look this up for themselves and accept that this is a common term both popularly and in the scholarship and we therefore need to mention it. — LlywelynII 04:28, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 May 2016[edit]

rey was the king of all of them

198.97.62.30 (talk) 19:36, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Apuldram (talk) 22:09, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Persecution of Jews linked to ritual cleansing?[edit]

At school we were taught that Jews practised ritual cleansing and therefore were less susceptible to the plague. Their lower mortality rate would then have made them appear suspicious in the eyes of their Christian neighbours. Thus leading to accusations of guilt and to persecution. I do not have any expertise or literature to check whether this theory is correct - can anyone help? It would then be worth a mention in the Wikipedia article, which does not really explain why the persecutions happened. 86.170.123.32 (talk) 19:25, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Bubonic plague[edit]

This article is totally lacking the words Bubonic plague, which makes it very impossible to search for in Google. Most references at the bottom of the page refer to the event as the Bubonic plague, as it is colloquially known in the United States. I can only surmise there's some scholarly argument against usage of the phrase "Bubonic plague", however, that scholarly argument probably shouldn't apply to an article about what we know today as the Bubonic plague. Maybe a footnote correcting the reader is a more appropriate path to history revisionism. 67.0.34.219 (talk) 19:12, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

I do not see the problem. When I did a search on "bubonic plague" in the article on the Black Death I got 28 hits. If you search on bubonic plague in google you get the Wiki article on bubonic plague, which mentions the Black Death in the lead. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:50, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 September 2016[edit]

Template:More Pictures specifically this one https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/40/1c/32/401c32669057dfa32c9d124f1ae6defa.jpg

 Not done That image doesn't seem to add anything useful to the article. Also, most users won't be able to read it. What language is it in? Apuldram (talk) 15:09, 28 September 2016 (UTC)