User:Levithon2007

About me
I'm a currently college student, some hobbies of mine include weightlifting and mountain biking. I live in the US with my family of six, we own a large piece property with lots of space for activates like mountain biking. Weightlifting is a great way to stay in shape I weightlift 5-6 days a week for two hours, people who are just starting weightlifting may consider getting profession help as to not injure themselves proper form is very important.

My Wikipedia Interests
if I'm active on Wikipedia in the future, I'll probably choose to edit articles related to working out. If I do decide to contribute to these articles about exercise I believe that I a may be able to help expand people's knowledge or subside their misconceptions on various kinds of exercise. In some cases a common misconception people have is if they work out they will look bulky, but what they don't understand is that muscle is compact and light whereas fat is thick and heavy. Proper technique is also something I could inform people on it is very important because it not only stops you from injuring yourself but also helps you targets the right muscle.

Article Evaluation
I have a strong interest in woodworking, which is why I decided to visit the Wikipedia article on the subject. After reading through the article, I noticed three aspects of it worth commenting on, the accuracy of facts, the neutrality of the writing, and the presence of bias.

neutrality
The neutrality of the writing was satisfactory. The article contained few biased claims or language and was mostly free of grammar errors. However, there were some irrelevant sections or sentences which could have been removed in order to make the article more concise and focused.

accuracy of facts
The accuracy of facts in the Wikipedia article was generally good, as each claim was cited with a reliable source. Moreover, the sources were up-to-date, ensuring the article was providing readers with the most current information. However, while the article was overall accurate, there were some aspects that could have been covered in more detail, leaving some viewpoints under-represented.

presence of bias
Finally, the presence of bias in the article was pretty minimal. The sources used were mostly unbiased, and there was no evidence of any particular viewpoint being over-represented. All in all, the article was fair and balanced, providing readers with an objective look at the topic.

Conclusion
In conclusion, the Wikipedia article on woodworking was of good quality overall. It was accurate, neutral, and unbiased, providing readers with an objective and up-to-date overview of the topic. The article could have been improved by including more detail on certain aspects and removing some irrelevant sections, but these were minor issues.