My name is Rami and I attend Everett Community College in Washington. I have many interests and one that stands out is piloting. I've always thought It'd be difficult for me to learn piloting as you'd have to attend college for years and years on end but without a doubt, it's a dream of mine and I'd like to someday travel the world while having passengers on board my aircraft. I'm also intrigued by Early Childhood Education. I've always found myself good with children seeing as I've been babysitting almost my entire life.

I spend the majority of my time at home playing video games or watching anime since the Pacific Northwest mostly consists of rain and not much happens outside. A personal favorite subject in school was history. I admire the old scenery, bars, homes, style, fashion and more. I'm most intrigued when it comes to the First and Second World Wars. I once had an account on Wikipedia, long forgot about it and my credentials for it but I edited many articles before, most of them being about history and getting the facts correct. I left the sourcing to the professionals since I was a bit young at the time. If I ever do volunteer again, I'll be more than happy to edit articles about both the world wars. I also hope that someday, I get the opportunity to make an article of my own. Fun Fact: Avocados are not vegetables.^[1]

The Pirate Bay has been a revolutionary creation given to the digital world of file sharing. With that in mind, I visited The Pirate Bay article on Wikipedia and found these three aspects of it worth commenting on. The article has excellent citations, stays neutral throughout the reading, and consists of minor grammar mistakes.

The Wikipedia article is referenced from well-respected sources. This includes links to court documents, news articles from broadcasting companies such as the BBC, Theguardian.com and even sourcing interviews with the authors of The Pirate Bay. Although many of the sources contained in this article are years old, most of the controversial events that conspired were during that time. There are scarcely any new articles about The Pirate Bay since there hasn't been a major controversy in relation to them for a while. Additionally, almost every fact included in this article is backed up by 1 or 2 citations. Across the citations that were noticeable, the majority of them led to news outlets from well-known companies. For the most part, the sources I skimmed through (53) were never biased and only relayed the information that was happening instead of giving their opinions on the situation. I attempted to click on most of the links to check if any of them were dead links and surprisingly, despite the sources being old, none of them were dead links and even took me to cached links (older version of the websites)

Keeping neutrality counteracts misinformation and The Pirate Bay article does a great job of it. The article was packed full of facts rather than opinionated responses to controversy, a great number of facts leading me to reliable news articles on official websites. Not to mention, the Wikipedia article addresses disputes, acknowledging viewpoints and making an appearance from both sides to give an accurate description of what events conspired to lead to the controversy that occurred whether that be court appearances or legal trouble befalling the organizations running it.

Grammar is probably the most reoccurring issue in terms of viewing a Wikipedia article. The article on The Pirate Bay, on numerous occasions, find myself reading a different style of writing every 2-3 paragraphs. This also includes duplicate words being used at the end of sentences. This should be common since Wikipedia holds a great deal of contributors to each article but vandalism is a common occurrence. For the most part, awkward phrasing is what really caught my eye while reading the article. I do think the article came out to be a bit too long as some of the reading I did was unnecessary and skipped through it to get to the facts.

All in all, I'd rate The Pirate Bay Article an "adequate" rating. The article in my opinion isn't the best but also isn't the worst. This is mostly due to the awkward rephrasing overshadowing the important facts given in the article. The overall writing style changes significantly as I read through the page, coupled with the awkward phrasing isn't a very good combination. With all the criticism behind it, I admire the sources that they used, obtained information from reliable and credible news media outlets, and the citations were great. I also think that the neutrality aspect they kept upholding throughout was done adequately.