I do not have many examples of revision that I can give for my synthesis paper, since many of my classmates thought it was fine the way it was. However, my teacher did point out when, and how to use block quoting in a paper. When I originally wrote my synthesis paper, I used a really long quote which took up about a half of a page. My quote looked like this
“[Much of the so-called African Slave Trade was fabricated. There was no trade! An independent source showing that the so-called Indians on the Eastern Seaboard (also called Terra Nova), were Moors, is a book called; "Africans and Native Americans", by Jack D. Forbes. He shows in the book how many so-called Native American Indians were sold into slavery in Africa and Europe. This is the opposite direction in which we were taught the slave trade went in. These Native Americans or Indians were classified as Negroes and Blacks in the slaves books of Seville Spain and elsewhere. On page 29 he says; " slaves from Terranova show up in the slave markets of Seville and Valencia very soon after 1500. For example; in Valencia during the period to 1516, we find in 1503 Miguel, Manne, in 1505 Juan and Pedro, in 1507 Antonio and Juan Amarco, in 1515 Ali, now Melchor, in 1516 Catalina. ... They were all classified as Negroes...” If we were first brought to North America around 1619 or even 1555, for that matter, then how were they taking slaves from Newfoundland, to Europe? Keep in mind that one of the "Native Americans" even had the name "Ali" and all were classified as Negro once they reached Yalencia. How did a Native American in 1515 have the Moorish name "Ali"?] (Robert Strongrivers)”, in stead of actually having both a left and right indent as it was suppose to. Another error that he helped me to correct was citing video sources such as a video off of youtube.com. My original citing was as follows
“Dr. Ivan Van Sertima . (2009 January 10). They Came Before Columbus [video]. Video posted to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IywJ1DGuecY”
instead of being like this
“Dr Ivan Van Sertima & mjrob1914. January 10, 2009. They Came Before Columbus. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IywJ1DGuecY”. Only a minor difference, but it is those differences which separate a good writer from a great one.
My research paper’s errors dealt with having more detail in my paper, such as changing “Obama’s main plan of action is to change…” to “ Obama's main plan of action to get the United States back on its feet financially is…”. The small change in detail, helps the reader know exactly what I am talking about, instead of leaving it to question. Many of those who edited my paper complained bout “religion” being too general, but this is where I actually had to say no to a comment, and follow what I believed was to be right. I did not think religion was too general for what I was talking about.
I believe that overall these two papers show I have grown to become an adept writer, capable of writing about anything that is thrown at me. The level of pathos, logos, and ethos I use in my writing is balanced almost to perfection. No writer is ever as good as he or she ever wants to be, and I agree, but I think that I am good enough to be able to write papers for general purposes; whether that is writing to get an entry position for a new job, or writing a paper in business.