User:Spike64113/sandbox

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Article Draft

Armour

Quilted Armour (pre 5th - 14th Century)

There was a vast amount of armour technology available through the 5th to 16th centuries. Most soldiers during this time wore padded or quilted armor. This was the cheapest and most available armor for the majority of soldiers. Quilted armour was usually just a jacket made of thick linen and wool meant to pad or soften the impact of blunt weapons and light blows. Although, this technology predated the 5th century, it was still extremely prevalent because of the low cost and the weapon technology at the time made the bronze armor of the Greeks and Romans obsolete.


Cuir Bouilli (5th-10th Century)

Hardened leather armour also called Cuir Bouilli was a step up from quilted armour. Made by boiling leather in either water, wax or oil to soften it so it can be shaped, it would then be allowed to dry and become very hard.[1] Large pieces of armour could be made such as breast plates, helmets, and leg guards, but many times smaller pieces would be sewn into the quilting of quilted armour or strips would be sewn together on the outside of a linen jacket. This was not as affordable as the quilted armour but offered much better protection against edged slashing weapons.

Chain mail (11th-16th Century)

The most common type during the 11th through the 16th centuries was the Hauberk. Made of interlinked rings of metal, it sometimes comprised of a coif that covered the head, and a tunic that covered the torso, arms, and legs down to the knees. Chain mail was very effective at protecting against light slashing blows but ineffective against stabbing or thrusting blows. The great advantage was that it allowed a great freedom of movement and was relatively light with significant protection over quilted or hardened leather armour. It was far more expensive than the hardened leather or quilted armour because of the massive amount of labor it required to create. This made it unattainable for most soldiers and only the more wealthy soldiers could afford it. Later, toward the end of the 13th century banded mail became popular. Constructed of washer shaped rings of iron overlapped and woven together by straps of leather as opposed to the interlinked metal rings of chain mail, banded mail was much more affordable to manufacture. The washers were so tightly woven together that it was very difficult penetrate and offered greater protection from arrow and bolt attacks.[2] thumb|right|Banded Mail Armour Construction

Jazerant (11th century)

The Jazerant or Jazeraint was an adaptation of chain mail in which the chain mail would be sewn in between layers of linen or quilted armour.[3] Exceptional protection against light slashing weapons and slightly improved protection against small thrusting weapons, but little protection against large blunt weapons such as maces and axes. This gave birth to reinforced chain mail and became more prevalent in the 12th and 13th century. Reinforced armour was made up of chain mail with metal plates or hardened leather plates sewn in. This greatly improved protection from stabbing and thrusting blows.

Scale Armour (12th century)

A type of Lamellar armour,[4] was made up entirely of small, overlapping plates. Either sewn together, usually with leather straps, or attached to a backing such as linen, or a quilted armor. Scale armour does not require the labor to produce that chain mail does and therefore is more affordable. It also affords much better protection against thrusting blows and pointed weapons. Though, it is much heavier, more restrictive and impedes free movement.

Plate Armour (14th century)

Plate armour covered the entire body. Although parts of the body were already covered in plate armour as early as 1250, such as the Poleyns for covering the knees and Couters - plates that protected the elbows,[5] the first complete full suit without any textiles was seen around 1410-1430. [6] Components of medieval armour that made up a full suit consisted of a cuirass, a gorget, vambraces, gauntlets, cuisses, greaves, and sabatons held together by internal leather straps. Improved weaponry such as crossbows and the long bow had greatly increased range and power. This made penetration of the chain mail hauberk much easier and more common.[7] By the mid 1400's most plate was worn alone and without the need of a hauberk.[8] Advances in metal working such as the blast furnace and new techniques for carburizing made plate armour nearly impenetrable and the best armour protection available at the time. Although plate armour was fairly heavy, because each suit was custom tailored to the wearer, it was very easy to move around in. A full suit of plate armour was extremely expensive and mostly unattainable for the majority of soldiers. Only very wealthy land owners and nobility could afford it. The quality of plate armour increases as more armour makers became more proficient in metal working. A suit of plate armour became a symbol of social status and the best made were personalized with embellishments and engravings. Plate armour saw continued use in battle until the 17th century.

Peer Review by Jtm7dd (talk) 16:31, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

I really like how you structure the paragraphs, focusing on just one type of armor at a time. I also think the wording is great, it is to the point and easy to read and understand. The only thing I can really think of changing would be that branded mail could probably have a little more said about it if possible. The difference between it and chain mail wasn't very clear here to me atleast. I may have to try writing my paragraphs similar to this rather than giving each little section its own heading... Keep up the good work!

Peer Review by Markhampton8 (talk) 01:55, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

The organization of your thoughts about each piece of armor has a nice flow to it. I like how you discuss the method in which it was made followed by the benefits and downfalls of such a design. I also like how you relate these to the specific attack motions that could be exerted on the armor. When you create your weapons section, I think it would be beneficial if you were able to find a chart showing the best attack options towards some of the armor you discussed. I also think you could create subheadings for each armor type to make the ideas easier to find for readers. It seems to me that Jazerant and Scale Armour need to be elaborated on more. You have a complete thought for each, but when compared to Chainmail or Hardened Leather Armour it seems those are covered more deeply. If you are able to find dates when these armor types were used or first created, I think that may help as well. The 5th to 16th centuries is a large time span. Overall, I think you guys have a solid method for going about this topic. Good job! (I apologize for submitting this late, I did not realize the deadline was 5:00pm tonight, also I'm not sure why but I submitted this at 8:55pm March 18 and the time shows tomorrow morning)

[Response to Peer Review]

I have attempted to address reviews left in my sandbox and my partner is addressing reviews left in his. Ive tried to expand on banded and scale armour and clarify the difference between banded and scale. It's very difficult to expand much on the scale armour, because unfortunately there is very little information available on it. Iv also added citations to these areas in the hopes that this will help the reader.

Because I am only focusing on the armour section, i wont be editing the weapons section and therefore wont have time to create a weapons chart.

its difficult to track down some specific dates as to when a specific type of armour was originally created. Most that Ive discussed here have evidence of being used even before the 5th century. The scope of the article to more to inform the types of armour technology in use, not necessarily to discuss only the advances in armour. Anytime i can give an exact date I will, and will continue to seek out more specific dates of first use. The main exception is the full suit of plate armour. This armour if far more documented and therefore has a better timeline available.

[Sources Medieval technology]

Sources for expanding the armour section

Arms and Armour of Late medieval Europe Woosnam-Savage, Robert S. On Order at M S&T library

European Arms & Armour Ashdown, Charles Henry 3rd floor Library U820 .A8

Arms & Armour Journal of the Royal Armories Trustees of the Royal Armories U799 .A745

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Components_of_medieval_armour This has no citation but is a useful list of components

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/medieval/7-types-medieval-armour.html


[Article Selection]

Selected Article - 

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_technology

Will be working in sandbox - 

    https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Csrfpz/sandbox&action=edit

    This article was chosen because there are a lot of vague and just one sentence descriptions under many headings. There is a lot of plagiarized and uncited information and sources. There are many very important topics that need to be expanded on such as agriculture and military technology.


[Article Evaluation] [9]

Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? 

           "In the 20th century, Farouk El-Baz from Egypt worked for NASA and was involved in the first Moon landings with the Apollo program, where he was secretary of the Landing Site Selection Committee, Principal Investigator of Visual Observations and Photography, chairman of the Astronaut Training Group, and assisted in the planning of scientific explorations of the Moon, including the selection of landing sites for the Apollo missions and the training of astronauts in lunar observations and photography." This does does not fall under "Ancient Egyptian Astronomy" but instead should be Modern Egyptian Astronomy".

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? 

            There does not seem to be any bias.

Are there viewpoints that are over represented, or underrepresented? 

            Not necessarily view points, the paragraph about the Pyramids, their construction, and how they relate to Astronomy and the Cosmos could be heavily expanded upon. The relationship of the Pyramids and Astronomy is hugely important in Ancient Egypt and this article barley touches it.

Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? 

            The one that does not seem to be accurate has been commented on.

Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?

Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added? 

            Pyramid construction an orientation and its relation to astronomy
            Religion in Ancient Egypt and its relationship with astronomy
            Astronomy's significance in everyday Ancient Egyptian life
            Astronomy's impact on Agriculture in Ancient Egypt

Check out the Talk page of the article. What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic? 

            There is very little conversation or "interest" in the topic to my surprise.

How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects? 

The article is part of 3 wikiProjects
        WikiProject Ancient Egypt  rated start class mid importance
        WikiProgect History of Science rated start class
        wikiProject Astronomy rated start class

How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class? 

        The article briefly discusses Ptolemaic Egypt, Ptolemy and the Almagest. This was discussed in class, but the discussion was during or after the Muslim conquest of Egypt.

[Article Addition or Copyedit]

Ancient Egyptians had a strong connection to the stars. They believed once a king was deceased, their soul would rise to heavens and become a star.[10] Translated pyramid texts describe the king ascending and becoming the Morning Star among the Imperishable Stars. [11]

  1. ^ Flank, Lenny (May 24, 2016). "A History of European Armor". Hidden History.
  2. ^ Ashdown, Charles Henry (1967). European Arms & Armour. New York: Brussel & Brussel. pp. 134–138.
  3. ^ Andre-Driussi, Micheal (2008). Lexicon Urthus (second ed.). Sirius Fiction. p. 192. ISBN 0964279517.
  4. ^ DeVries, Kelly; Smith, Robert Douglas (2012). Medievil Militay Technology (Second ed.). Canada: University of Toronto Press. p. 70. ISBN 978-1-4426-0497-1.
  5. ^ DeVries, Kelly; Smith, Robert Douglas (2012). Medieval Military Technology. Canada: University of Toronto Press. p. 75. ISBN 978-1-4426-0497-1.
  6. ^ Ashdown, Charles Henry (1967). European Arms & Armour. New York: Brussel & Brussel. p. 194.
  7. ^ DeVries, Kelly; Smith, Robert Douglas (2012). Medieval Military Technology (second ed.). Canada: University of Toronto Press. p. 74. ISBN 978-1-4426-0497-1.
  8. ^ Ashdown, Charles Henery (1967). European Arms & Armour. New York: Brussel & Brussel. p. 196.
  9. ^ "Egyptian astronomy".
  10. ^ Relk, Joan (2002–2003). "Ancient Egyptian Astronomy: Ursa Major-- Symbol of Rejuvenation". Archaeoastronomy. 17: 64–80. {{cite journal}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help)CS1 maint: date format (link)
  11. ^ Faulkner, R.O. (1969). The Ancient Egyptian Pyramid Texts. Oxford: The Clarendon Press. pp. 154, 155, 162, 173, 253. {{cite book}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Spike64113/sandbox&oldid=838106773"