I’m writing to you to discuss my feelings and opinion about your editing of the Wikipedia article, “Serial Killers”, that I have recently read. I’m not going to bash your article because it is a good article and you did a good job of editing it or otherwise it would have been flagged. I just wanted to discuss with you what I felt you did good, but also where I felt you were lacking in your article or you can improve on. Overall, your article is a good article because it is accurate, has good sources, and is properly and frequently edited, and is credible, but is lacking in quality. Your article does mostly what it is expected to do as a Wikipedia article and that is that it gives you the facts but it lacks quality which essentially gives the reading a connection to the writing.
The accuracy of the article “Serial Killers” is perfect because it is properly revised and edited frequently. In my English 112 class, we discussed editing of articles and the reliability of Wikipedia. I was one of those students who were told in high school not to use Wikipedia because many teachers believe that the facts given on the website are inaccurate. One of your facts that was proven to be right is your definition for a serial killer from your article “Serial Killers”, which is “An individual who has murdered three or more people over a period of more than a month, with down time between the murders”, is accurate because it is also the same definition that I got from also many different sources. Many of my teachers also believed that since the article could be edited by more than one person that anyone can hack and intentionally destroy the website, but surprisingly I found out in our discussion that the website is reliable. If there is an error, or missed spelled word, or incorrect date, etc…, it is fixed in a matter of minutes. Your article, in particular, is very accurate because it is frequently edited and revised, so if there are any mistakes it is fixed quite quickly. The information that you give in your article is also accurate based off of the various different sources shown in the article.
You also give good sources. The article contains not only just other articles, but other various different types of sources. It includes books like “Murder in America” by Ronald Holmes, “Murder Most Rare: The Female Serial Killer” by Michael Kelleher, and “Serial Offenders” by Kevin Borgeson. “Murder in America” explains the media in America and why America finds it fascinating. I thought you could use a quotes from the book like “In the 1991 film The Silence of the Lambs, the main character tries to track down a serial murderer by getting inside the mind of convicted killer Hannibal Lecter “, which could show how U.S. media and citizens fascination with murderers (Holmes 1). This quote would give more quality to your article because it displays more than just facts but emotion, even though; the emotion is sadistic and scary. It would give your article life. “In the book “Murder Most Rare: The Female Serial Killer”, it tries to differentiate the male serial killer from the female killer and explain why are women so rare to be serial killers. “Serial Offenders” is a great source because in the book it explain how to classify a serial murder, what is the motive of the killer, and what do all of their victims have in common. I was impressed that there were many and even different types of sources used in the article. I was also impressed on how frequent the article is revised and edited.
The article is edited at least every week that I have seen so far over the history of the article, which brings new facts or information. It helps to make sure that the article is not tampered with. If the article is properly edited it then can be used by people, or even students, like me, to use as a source because the information given is more likely to be accurate. If the article is properly edited also it decreases the possibility of plagiarism, which is easy to do, but you have not done so. Your article also has never been flagged which is reassuring to your reader that the information is correct, but also that, even though, the article is edited frequently, that the edits made are accurate and also correct.
The things I have mentioned before, which are: accuracy; good sources; and proper editing history; is what makes the article so credible because you know that your facts are not coming from false information. This is why it is great that you have more than one source and they are various different types of sources to back up your research. The accuracy and editing history of your article go hand-in-hand because if the paper is not properly and frequently edited then the article is not accurate, but since your article is edited frequently most errors are removed quite quickly. The only thing is your quality of writing.
The quality of writing and editing of the article is lacking in certain areas to me. The way the article is written gives the reader no connection to the article. I like it when I’m reading an article, book, journal, or whatever the piece of writing it may be, for it to make me feel some type of emotion whether the emotion is good or bad. The topic of my paper for my English 112 class is “Why Do Serial Killers Kill?” and the purpose of me reading your article was to get the facts, but also to find some information about the emotion or feelings of the killer, their friends and family, and the feelings of the victims family. I did not get any of that from your article at all. I also found some great material that could have been used in one of your sources. One great quote that I thought could have been used was “I enjoyed killing. Yes, that’s correct, I actually enjoyed killing. I enjoyed killing young females. Slender ones. The cheerleader type. The prettier the better…Good Old fashion rape. Then murder”, which was written by psychopathic killer from one of your sources that you listed (Holmes 11). These words captured my attention and made me feel disgusted, sick, scared, and angry, all at the same time. I wanted to feeI at least one of these emotions but sadly I did not feel any emotion from your article. Emotion help to give the article life, whether or not the emotions are good or bad because my emotions were definitely bad after reading the murderers words but it caught my attention and you need to catch your reader’s attention. I felt like I was just dragging through the words and counting down how many more paragraphs I had to read until I was finally finished when reading your article. I’m sorry if I come off rude or a little insulting, but I like it when a reader looks at my work and tells me exactly what’s on their mind, which is, my only intention. I feel like that’s how a good piece of work becomes a great piece of work. It lacks creativity and style, which are the key components of making just a good article become a great article. It’s the way you put words that make them interesting and, in my opinion, editors are supposed to organize the words to give them that pop that makes the writing leap off the page and your writing just didn’t do that for me, instead I felt like it had entirely to many facts and I honestly didn’t believe that that wasn’t even possible until now. Overall, the article was good, but if given more than just facts it could be more than just good. I say these words with good intentions and love.
From:
Sparkalena Boose
No comments:
Post a Comment