User:Bulkypenguins

Bio

About Me

I am a Highschool student living in the Pacific Northwest, I am currently taking college classes and working for my associates degree. My hobbies are drawing, basketball, and binge watching T.V shows. I've always had an interest in writing, but I have never liked reading. Basketball has always had a special place in my heart. Basketball is a sport played globally, that consists of ten players split into two teams, working against each other to get the ball into the opposing teams hoop.

My Wikipedia Interests

After being told not to use Wikipedia my whole life, I am suddenly being taught of the wonders it brings and the site's importance through it's unique feature of letting viewers edit the articles. Some type of content I would see myself reviewing would mostly lean towards criminals. Many years ago, I ended up falling into a deep rabbit hole of criminal research and It has just stuck with me after all those years. Criminals I know concerningly too much about are John Wayne Gacy, Ted Bundy, and Dennis Rader.

Article Evaluation

intro

Stumbling upon Wikipedia's Horse Hoof article, It interested me with it's shortcomings of professionalism. The articles lack of citation, lack of comprehendible language, and  usage of overly vague detailing, makes the article questionable in it's validity.

citations

The first noticeable thing about the Horse hoof article is it's lack of citations. Citations are a core part of articles and give the readers reassurance and trust between them and the source material. It shows that the writer knows what they are talking about and that they have evidence to back it up. Citations also give credit to other writers who have spent time researching their works and gives them recognition. The main point  to write an article is to educate the readers on the subject, without citations an article loses it's value and importance. Despite having ten different sections, the horse hoof article only has two external links and five references. Only after the eleventh paragraph did it have it's first citation.

vague detailing

Not only is the horse hoof article missing citations, but it is also flagged for vague detailing. An observation I have made with other articles is that the introduction is at least a couple paragraphs long. This is an interesting factor because the horse hoof article not only has just one paragraph, but it is made up of only three sentences. It also fails to recognize that not everyone is knowledgeable of the different terms. It lacks the extra information that is needed to give the reader a true understanding on the topic of horse hoofs.

confusing writing

This article lacks in it's citation and information but one thing it does not lack is it's ability to confuse you while reading. In the "anatomy" section, the writer uses various amounts of words and names that seems only a person already educated on the topic would understand. In the Articles "talk" page, many complain about the articles confusing wording and it's lack of specification. This all may be explained because of the writers lack of English knowledge. The writer explains in his comments that he is Italian and has very poor English skills. While many people have edited the article since then, the original writers poor translations could have still lingered from then.

conclusion

overall, this article has a noticeable amount of mistakes in it. To the blind eye it seems legitimate because of it's use of scientific and complex wording, but that also amounts to what makes the article so flawed. This article can be improved by adding a greater amount of citations and more in depth writing.