Wikipedia in this example was a good source. It didn’t seem very biased or objective. Everything had citations to prove the facts and there wasn’t any extra descriptive fluff that would’ve influenced a person to think a certain way about Harun. Everything was very factual and decisive which made it very informative and easy to read. The page itself is set up in a simple yet effective way. Each is organized in different sections, but it’s all chronological which made it easy to read and understand. Also it had links on names and phrases that led to definitions and additional information which was also helpful. The quick summary on the side with the picture and the first paragraph gave a nice overview of the passage. Everything seemed evenly written, given the amount of information, although the page could have elaborated on his relationships with other rulers. Towards the end organization seemed to be slipping away however.
After reading this I did have questions about his sons, what he did in particular that made him so famous, and how he died. Wikipedia did a mediocre job answering a few of my questions, but of course it also created more. There was much vagueness surrounding his death, and there was barely anything about his sons, and his court. Thinking back on it there is uncertainty about Harun in general, because most things we know about him is from fictitious recounts of his life. To go looking for more information I’d probably go to some history website (History channel), an online encyclopedia, or an education website (discovery, BBC, PBS, maybe brainpop if I get desperate) they seem to be the most trustful things on the Internet. I’d probably filter it by how specific each article, or video is to what I want know. If I want to know about his military conquests, I’m not going to read or watch something about his court life.
I think Harun sparks so much imagination because he went thought the entity’s to establish good ties with other empires instead of going through and conquering them. He seems more strategic and a nicer through that action. When he tried making good relations with other empires other people from those empires are bound to have written nice thing shown about Haurn and spread his story. His own court wrote many fictitious glorifying things about him, like I suppose every court does for its current ruler and some people might’ve took fictitious things literally making him appear mightier. The page I think tempers this notoriety. It sets the record straight. It debunks myths and it backs its assertions with facts. It explains why some myths are wrong and it gives a historically accurate portrayal of Harun, it’s not a portrayal through myths, and I think by doing that it really tones Harun down to a normal caliph.