Wikipedia Article - Spartacus

I knew very little of Spartacus, other than it was a movie about some guy. I have hear the phrase “I am Spartacus” but never knew what it meant. So when I came across the “war of Spartacus” in our reading I decided to follow up on it. I must say, I really know little more now than I did then. The article has conflicting information. No one is really quite sure where Spartacus came from. Was he Greek or was he Thracian? He was apparently once a Roman soldier, but from why? There is no doubt he was a slave. There is no doubt he kept the armies of Roman at bay for quite some time. There is controversy over whether it was his intention to fight and plunder as much as they did or if he acted upon the wishes of the hosts that followed him. One thing is for sure. He is viewed as a hero. As a survivor. An inspiration to many in whatever struggles they are experiencing. However, not everyone we make a hero truly desires the title, and it would be nice to find some information that I could be sure was accurate and complete. The article was 1193 words long. The terms I originally googled were War of Spartacus - the result, Wikipedia link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spartacus#References The actual title of the article “Spartacus” The disambiguation link referenced the original of the name Spartacus, films, musicals, and novels based on the story of Spartacus. The discussion link spent a great deal of time on Spartacus’ origin. There is mention of a few insignificant items like grammar usage, video games, and the meaning of the phrase “I am Spartacus.” But then returns to the argument of his origin and the changing of the article without factual backup. The first change was made to the article in September 8, 2008, with the last change on December 19, 2002 The total number of edits 147 There are 13 references, 3 external links Although on the discussion there was mention of “further reading” admittedly I could not find no such information All in all, no I would not recommend this reading. I felt it was generally uninformative and confusing.