User:RM395/Course/Encyclopedia comparisons/jeflicki

For this assignment, the topic I looked up was the printing. I used a hardback copy of the 14th edition of Encyclopedia Britannica (Copyright 1939) that my parents still had and the History of printing Wikipedia article (http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/History_of_printing). There were about 20 or some volumes in the set.

Comparison

Since the Wikipedia article's space was less limited than the printed volume, it was a bit longer. Many of the historical details are more specific and its organization is more clear. There is quite a lot more information on pre-modern printing methods and non-European methods of printing. As expected, the article was much more update with developments in printing that occurred after it was published. Many small images to supplement the texts in some sections.

The Encyclopedia Britannica article had fewer images, but the ones that they had were much more detailed. There was an image that took up an entire page that showed an example of a page from the Gutenberg Bible. There were much more information on different printing machines and a few components.

Judgement

The overall amount of images in both sources was lacking in some topics. Both articles maintained a neutral perspective. The Wikipedia article was overall more comprehensive and had a better focus on different aspects on printing.

The Wikipedia article is better since it can much more up to date and is much easier to follow. --Jeflicki (talk) 05:37, 18 February 2013 (UTC)