User:MoAbbasi23

Bio

About Me:

I'm currently a student living in the Pacific Northwest, going to school at my local community college. I am currently undecided on what I want to get my major in, I'm stuck between Business or Computer Science. After completing my two years at community college I hope to transfer to a four year university to further my education. I enjoy listening to music because it helps me stay focused throughout the day, keeps my mind fresh and keeps me from being stressed out. I am also a huge sports fanatic, mainly Basketball and Football but still follow other sports. My current favorite NFL team is the Seattle Seahawks, and my favorite NBA team is the Los Angeles Lakers.

My Wikipedia Interests:

As of now my Wikipedia interests would most likely revolve around sports, being players, teams, or coaches. So if I were to start making changes on Wikipedia for sports players, coaches, or teams I would try to give out the most accurate information that I can find on that person and would try to eliminate all prejudice/bias. I think it would be really remarkable to create a Wikipedia page on an up and coming athlete that could make it big. I've been watching/following the NBA since I was about five and it would be amazing to expose a player and their talents online even if they weren't the best player in high school, college, or the NBA.

Article Evaluation

When I was younger I was always into baking different types of foods with my mom and sisters. I remember there was different types of utensils but the ones I remember the most were whisks and mixers. So I decided to do some research on mixers and once I reached the page I was sort of shocked. I visited the Mixers (appliance) page on Wikipedia, and found three aspects of it worth commenting on: its lack of citations, lack of information about the history of mixers, and the lack of showing how much a mixer would cost on average.

Citations:

In the Wikipedia page about Mixers, there aren't as many citations as I thought there would be. Many of the articles used for the citations have been outdated as well many of them were from 2012 and there was one from 2018. Also when I clicked on the wiki link for electronic mixers, there was no citations used at all, only wiki links were used. This section of the article could use some revising and fact checking to make sure everything that is presented on the page is accurate information coming from a reliable source.

Information:

As far as information, it doesn't really go into depth about the history of mixers and how they were created, and most of the information seems outdated as it doesn't really go into depth about the making of mixers past the 1900s. The information mainly just talks about the different types of mixers and explains what each one does, but doesn't really explain each mixer, just shows some of the main ones. It also repeats a lot of the same information and some of the information that is provided isn't really needed. I believe that the page should also explain what each speed does for the electronic mixers as it isn't really stated.

Pricing:

The page gives examples of different types of mixers, but doesn't explain the pricing of any of them. I understand I wouldn't necessarily come to Wikipedia to find out the prices of mixers, but if I happen to be on the page for it, it would be nice to see the average prices for the mixers that get used the most. I think it would be important enough to add the prices of the different types of mixers.

Summary:

Overall, I think this Wikipedia page could use some changes. I would rate it as decent page that has lots of room for improving. Most of the information just gives us a little summary about what each mixer does rather than going to full description about the functions of each mixer. I believe the history of mixers could be updated with newer information. Most of the information and sources are outdated by almost ten years so the page could use some updating in general. The page uses a lot of the same information throughout the article but for the most part the article seems to stay true to itself by presenting the information, but seems outdated.