User:Jsinclairc/sandbox
In the category of yacht racing Wikipedia falls extremely short in its scope, readability, and accuracy when compared to The Oxford Encyclopedia of Maritime History (“OEMH”), as well as other similar articles about “sports of the rich and famous.” Yacht racing is not your average topic that most people are concerned with or care about. It is viewed as a sport of the wealthy and privileged, and because of this I believe susceptible to indifference. However, other obscure “rich and famous” sports, like Polo, receive almost 40x the word count than yacht racing (approximately 5500 vs. 140); croquet has almost 30x the word count of yacht racing. From this cursory analysis one would assume there is not that much content to write about yacht racing. Yet in the OEMH we find a word count of over 2000 compared to 140, almost 15x the coverage. Interestingly enough OEMH is not even writing about yacht racing in general, but yacht racing literature, a small subset of the sport itself. And while the focus on literature does provide a reader with a solid understanding of the history of the sport, as well as some of the ways the sport influenced society, it is still just about the print coverage of the sport. Therefore, in terms of comprehensiveness about the sport, both fallextremely short; in terms of comparing the two, on a scale of comprehensiveness, Wikipedia is a 1, OEMH a 4. With regard to accuracy, I find no problems in the OEMH. It is speaks about books and magazines, and as far as I can tell, the dates, authors, and titles are all accurate. The Wikipedia article is not accurate. Yacht racing does not include “…speed motorboat racing; competitive canoeing, kayaking, and rowing; model yachting, and navigational contests….” It does not include “hydrofoils, hovercrafts, or personal watercrafts.” It is only about sailboats. The only distinctions made in “yacht racing” circles are that of “one-design,” “big boats,” and “dinghies.” Every racing sailor knows this. Including hovercrafts, hydrofoils, and canoes in an article about yacht racing demonstrates the writer(s) lack of understanding, and it shows in the article’s writing style and organization.
The Yacht Racing Wikipedia article reads like a 5th grade book report from a student that sourced his/her information from someone who has never raced a sailboat in his/her life. In the previous paragraph I highlighted a couple major inaccuracies that contribute to such shoddy writing and lack of understanding. In contrast, the OEMH article reads like a professional analysis of yacht racing literature, clear and comprehensive with flowing prose and relevant vocabulary (of course! It was written by one of the subject’s best authors, John Rousmaniere). The bad writing in Wikipedia is probably a result of the lack of sources embedded within.
Lack of sources is an understatement. Wikipedia has no sources for the yacht racing article. Yet a cursory search in JSTOR returns over 500 sources, and Lexis-Nexis returns over 3000. Yes, some are probably not relevant, but the point is made. The OEMH has ten sources, and they relate to specific books discussed in the article. To provide zero sources on a subject that is highly advanced supports my earlier argument of indifference. Why?
The Wikipedia article on yacht racing is an anathema to anyone experienced in the sport, a sport that has Olympic credentials, historical weight, and nostalgicvalue. Compared to croquet, it deserves much more attention than has been given, and some serious editing to bring the article to a semblance of parody with other sports of its caliber. Yacht racing is a sport of strategy, like chess, but deals with the physical limitations of men’s ability to tame and harness nature for sport. I’ve raced sailboats since I was 4 years old, and in my humble opinion, this article needs to be scrapped and redone.