User:Jackrenaud33/sandbox

Prioritized Articles (9/23/2020)

1. Z-Boys
2. Surfboard shaper

Comprehensive Assessment: "Surfboard shaper"

The article I have chosen for this activity is “Surfboard Shaper”. The article has been rated as a “Start-Class” by Wikipedia. The article was flagged by Wikipedia for the following reasons: lack of inline citations, inadequate lead section, absence of literary clarity and topicality, and inability to follow the Manual of Style in regards to headings. These tags originated in 2013, and the last edits made to the article occurred in 2019. Furthermore, in the talk page, the article is associated with both WikiProject Water sports and WikiProject Occupations.

Following a comparison of articles classified as “Good” or “Featured”[1] with my own chosen article, I noticed that the GA and FA articles differ greatly in content, structure, and overall design aesthetic. Compared to “Surfboard Shaper”, both articles listed by WikiProjects Water sports not only incorporate content that is both clearer and more explanatory, but the overall literary tone is substantially more objective as well. Furthermore, the references and citations of these articles are clearly correlated with the included information, and the integrated graphics are both more informative and more visually appealing.

[1] The GA and FA articles I viewed were “Scuba Diving” and “Jesus College Boat Club (Oxford)”.

The purpose of the analyzed article seems to be to define what a “surfboard shaper” is as well as discuss the variations in surfboard construction over the years. However, Wikipedia does address that the included section on surfboard construction may be more topical to a different article. Furthermore, the subject addressed in the article “Surfboard shaper” is incredibly niche; thus, the audience it addresses limited due to a lack of general interest. Furthermore, due to the lack of subject interest, the majority of edits made in regards to the selected article has not been updated since 2013. While the information present in the article follows a relatively strong structure, the article fails to maintain an objective tone as per Wikipedia standards.

Overall, in terms of edits, the selected article “Surfboard Shaper” is rated as a “Start-Class” and requires both substantive and syntactical revision. In order to augment the literary effectiveness of the article, the editor needs to focus on rewriting the content to fit a more unbiased tone, restructuring the content to add to literary clarity, and solidify that the citations and references are both credible and spread out throughout the article.

Major Issue 2:

Article 1: Surfboard Shaper

1.     First, a large section of the information introduced in the article ‘Surfboard Shaper” does not pertain to the title; the article incorporates several sections regarding the history of the construction of surfboards. However, this article specifically focuses on surfboard shapers as people, rather than the shaping process itself. The inclusion of this information muddles the focus of the overall article.

2.     The information in this article, while avoiding making outlandish claims, is inherently biased, and the overall tone is far from neutral. The previous author of the article failed to construct the article with an objective vernacular; for example, in a description of surfboard technology (which does not even have any application to the article), the author writes, “…Considering that surfboards are relatively simple things, being made out of fiberglass and foam, it may be difficult to imagine just how far surfboard technology has come since the first recorded surfboards seen in Hawaii”. This statement encapsulates the non-objective tone of the article; defining surfboards as “simple” is an opinion does not have any basis of fact.

3.     In this article, the information that is being overrepresented, in fact, does not have to be included at all in the article. The sections on surfboard construction can be moved to a more topical article; however, in order to revitalize the substance of the article, the editor needs to focus on the underrepresented sections, specifically the introductory paragraph.

4.     Overall, a large majority of the information reads more as “original opinion” than “original research”. Thus, a large majority of the content, specifically the lead section, will have to be re-structured in order for the content to be displayed in a objective and neutral fashion.

5.     The overall citations attributed to this article are relatively incomplete; while certain incorporated references do remain topical to the presented content, a large majority of information either does not have attributed references or the included citations are not from reputable sources.

6.     The primary information that needs to be added to the article focuses on the lead section. In order to augment the substance and clarity of the article, more background needs to be presented on the topic in question.

Article 2: Z-Boys

1. Fortunately, the primary content presented throughout this article is topical to the subject; however, the most distracting element of the article centralizes around its lack of structural organization. Excluding the introductory paragraph (which presents issues of its own), the bulk of the primary content is conglomerated into one section; this lack of separation damages both the clarity and flow of the article.
2. While some of the information presented in this article can be defined as objective, a large majority of the content is written with the tone of a "personal description" While it is clear that a large majority of the "original research" completed for the article was influenced heavily by the movie "Lords of Dogtown", which showcases a fictional adaptation of the Z-Boys history, the movie is barely mentioned throughout the article. Furthermore, the article somewhat glorifies skateboarding, when it, in fact, needs to introduce the topic without personal bias.
3. While there are no sections that overrepresent any information, the two segments of the article that are definitely underrepresented are the lead section and the film adaptation section. The information presented in the introductory paragraph barely provides enough background regarding the subject, and the film adaptation section consists of a short list with no exemplifying information. Both sections need to be augmented in order to increase the literary substance of the article.
4. A large portion of the information, specifically located in the main content section, is written under the influence of personal bias. Thus, the overall information presented does not read in a completely objective and neutral tone.
5. While the references and citations listed in the article are relatively professional, they are by no means utilized evenly throughout the article. Due to this lack of homogenous distribution, the article does not maintain a professional tone, and the information presented without proper references is inherently discredited.
6. In terms of additional information, the editor primarily needs to focus on the introductory paragraph. The opening section needs to be supplemented by both additional background information as well as topical references.

Article Edits

Article 1: Surfboard Shaper

Edit Round 1: Lead Section

First, I made significant revision to both the content and the style of the introductory segment. The article’s lead section was initially flagged by Wikipedia for not “adequately [summarizing]” the content of the article; while the original section did introduce the topic of the article, it lacked supplemental information that introduces history and notability of the subject. I retained the presented information concerning the summarization of the actual process of surfboard shaping; however, I also consolidated and revised this information into a subsequent paragraph.Furthermore, in terms of added content, I continued the summarization of surfboard shaping. I believe that both supplementary statements provide a more detailed and explanatory summary of the article while maintaining an unbiased and objective tone as per Wikipedia standards. Specifically, I altered the following elements:

• The phrase "by hand" was deleted due to lack of factuality. While some surfboards are shaped completely by hand, other shapers utilize various machinery to complete the construction of a surfboard.
• The order of "designs" and "builds" was switched to improve literary flow.
• Sentences 2 and 3 added to enhance the substance of the lead section.
• The lead section is split into two separate paragraphs. I believe that this fragmentation allows for a more detailed summarization of the article.
• "Sanding machines" and "power planers" altered to "sanders" and "planes". This change was made so that each tool could be linked its corresponding Wikipedia page.

Additionally, the original lead section lacked both proper references and in-line citations. Following Wikipedia guidelines, I utilized a mix of original and new sources and incorporated them within the lead section. While the original references are not necessarily considered biased or lacking in credibility, I believe that the new sources I have provided may more closely adhere to Wikipedia guidelines. Specifically, I altered the following:

·      All defining statements are properly referenced

·      All listed materials or tools involved in the shaping process are linked to their related Wikipedia article.

Any additional sources that I utilized will be listed below.

Revised Lead Section:

A surfboard shaper is someone who designs and builds surfboards. The process of surfboard shaping has evolved over the years, and the shaper often tailors his or her work to meet the requirements of a client or a certain wave. Surfboard shapers can be independent or work in collaboration with mass-production companies.

While originally made from wood, most modern surfboards are now constructed from pre-formed polyurethane or Styrofoam blanks. The surfboard is then shaped using an array of tools, including but not limited to the following: surforms, rasps, sanders, and planes. After the form of the surfboard is sculpted from the blank, the shaper can lay fiberglass sheets over the top and bottom of the surfboard, and laminate each sheet with a thermosetting substance, such as polyester resin.^[1]

Additional Sources:

1. Kampion, Drew (2007). Greg Noll; The Art of the Surfboard. Layton, Utah: Gibbs Smith.
   ISBN 978-1-58685-776-9
   .
2. Miller, Steven Daniel (2007). Surfboard Shaping and Glassing. Lulu.com.
   ISBN 9781847285348
   .

Edit Round 2: Structural Revisions

Hello fellow Wikipedians!

For this specific editing post, I will be focusing on any large-scale structural revisions that could be made to the article. While the organization of the article promotes literary flow, I believe that there are several alterations that could be made to augment the overall aesthetic of the article.

The first major edit that I have suggested focuses on the consolidation of the “history” section. While informative, the opening content presented in the “history” section of the novel lacks topicality. The information presented by the original author more closely relates to the notability and applicability of the subject to the contemporary world. The original information is presented below.

"Most shapers today design surfboards using computer programs to generate data that can be supplied to a computer cutting facility which will mill the raw foam blank within 90% of the finished shape, leaving the shaper to fine-tune the blank to its final state before glassing. This method allows the shaper to have a very exacting and reproducible design which can be easily fine-tuned and adjusted. Wooden surfboards are making a comeback as an eco-friendly alternative, requiring ultra-light boatbuilding skills.

Many professional shapers outsource the highly specialized task of lamination to specialized "glassers", who laminate fiberglass to the foam core of the surfboard using thermosetting resins like polyester or epoxy. Fins and assorted plugs are usually installed after this process and the final product is fine sanded and often glossed with buffing compound and special glossing resin. When shaping, the shaper often takes into account the specifications of the client surfer, and molds his medium to best accommodate the user's personal surfing style and wave of choice.

Shapers play a design role in some companies that mass-produce surfboards ".''

I suggest that, in order to improve literary clarity, the “History” section be denoted as “Surfboard shaping in modern society”, and moved to the bottom of the article. I also suggest that each subsequent section (Ancient Hawaiian surfboards, The Hollow Board, The Hot Curl Board, New Construction), be consolidated into sub-sections to more accurately represent the “history” of surfboard shaping. Since each of these original sections showcases the evolution of surfboard shaping, I believe that they would be more applicable when located directly under the "history" section.

The second major edit that I have suggested centralizes around the “Notable shapers” section of the article. I suggest that the primary elements of the list (Hobie Atler, Skip Engblom, Donald Takayama, Simon Anderson, Robert August) be consolidated into sub-sections. However, while I do suggest that the supplemental content of these sections be seriously condensed in later edits, I believe that this initial alteration will improve the ease of reading within the article.

While I believe that my revisions are both beneficial and justified, I am open to any and all suggestions or comments regarding content, structure, or source

Edit Round 3: History Section

Content Revisions: “History Section”

Hello fellow Wikipedians!

For this specific editing post, I will be focused on the large-scale revision of the information presented in the “History” section of the article. Primarily, the edits I have made centralize around several key issues that I noticed when analyzing the article. The issues are listed as the following:

1.     A large majority of the body content does not remain topical to the article.

2.     Sub-section titles do not accurately represent their contents.

3.     The sources listed at the bottom of the article are not necessarily considered as “professional.”

4.     Each section does not include a single inline citation.

The primary source of a large majority of the issues with the article focus on the topic itself. The article was originally flagged by Wikipedia for “[lacking] focus or [being] about more than one topic”; the issue is most notably evident in the article’s excess discussion of related topics, including Surfboards and Surfboard shaping. The purpose of this article is to not discuss surfing itself, but to rather highlight the history and innovation of shapers. I have separated my revisions into listed sections below.

Section I: Ancient Hawaiian Surfboards

The section, titled “Ancient Hawaiian Surfboards” showcases the majority of my revisions. The original version of this section includes an excess of information that does not directly relate to “surfboard shaping” itself. In my revisions, I re-structured the purpose of each paragraph to focus more on the actual construction/shaper involvement in ancient Hawaii; this change is evident in my expansion of the information regarding the base materials and surfboard design difference. Moreover, I split this section into two sperate paragraphs in order to both mitigate any visual clutter as well as promote the literary flow of the article. I have attached the revised section below:

Ancient Hawaiian Surfboards:

There exists very little evidence to pinpoint the exact location of the first surfboard shaper; however, the majority of evidence suggests that surfboarding itself first originated in Hawaii. The Hawaiian islanders most likely utilized only three species of tree as the base for their surfboards: the wiliwili (Erythrina monosperma), ulu (Artocarpus incisa), and koa (Acacia koa). After the chosen tree was cut, Hawaiian shapers used sea coral and oahi stones for light reduction; subsequently, the root of the ti plant and the bark of the kukui plant were used for the final burnish of the surfboard.  Surfboard shaping was regarded by the Hawaiian islanders as a ceremonial rite; Hawaiian islanders often offered fish to surfriding trees as offerings.^[1]

Three foundational templates for surfboard shaping were utilized by the Hawaiian islanders: the alaia, the paipo, and the olo. The type of surfboard shape was actually indicative of Hawaiian social structure; the alaia and paipo boards were used by the commoners, while the olo boards were reserved for the royal class.^[2] However, the primary distinction between each ancient Hawaiian surfboard shape is their length and weight; paipo boards ranged from 3-6 feet long,^[3] alaia boards ranged from 7 to 12 feet long^[4], and olo boards measured up to 20 feet long.^[5]

Section II: The Hollow Board

The majority of the original information presented in this section stayed the same throughout my revision process in terms of base content; however, I added additional information regarding the advent of Tom Blake and the Hollow Board. Furthermore, I also adjusted the tone of the section to fit a more objective framework. I also re-defined the title of the section, changing it from “The Hollow Board” to “The Hollow Board era”. I believe that this revision steers the purpose of the article away from “surfboards” and more towards the historical context of surfboard shaping. I have attached the revised section below:

The “Hollow Board” era

The next technological change in the surfboard shaping industry came with the introduction of the “Hollow Board” by Hawaiian resident Tom Blake. In 1926, Blake acquired an ancient olo surfboard from Honolulu’s Bishop Museum; the board was originally 16 feet long and had a weight of 150 pounds. In an effort to replicate the structure of the olo board, Blake drilled holes in a redwood blank and sealed the top of with wood with sheets of veneer, effectively creating the first “hollow” surfboard.^[1] Blake’s innovative design drastically reduced the weight of the surfboard, and by 1930 the “Hollow Board” became the first mass-produced surfboard in the world.^[6]

Section III: The Hot Curl Board

This section also witnessed significant change throughout the revision process. The original information presented in this section was short and not backed by any historical evidence; in my revisions, I both provided sources as well as depicted a clearer picture of the shaping innovation that occurred in congruence with the construction of the hot curl board. Moreover, while the original content mentions the usage of balsa wood in the subsequent section, the “Balsa Era” actually occurred before the advent of the hot curl board; I ultimately decided to combine this information into this section in order to maintain the chronological timeline presented throughout the article.  I have attached the revised section below:

The Balsa Era and the Hot Curl board

The advent of the 1930s marks the next technological revolutions in the history of the surfboard shaper.

The addition of balsa wood subsequently led to the surfboard shaper’s move towards the “Hot Curl Design.” By shaving off parts of the tail and shaping the sides of the board, surfboard shapers were able to produce surfboards that allowed surfers to pull into the “curl” of a wave.[7]

Section IV: New Construction

The section originally titled “New Construction” was presented in an initially confusing framework; the original author jumps back and forth from “balsa wood” to “rocker” design in a way that does not necessarily align with the chronological history of surfboard shaping. Moreover, the last two paragraphs of this section are completely off-topic in regards to this article; while “fins” and “leashes” do have applicability to surfboards themselves, they are not an integral part of the process of the surfboard shaper.

In terms of revisions, I removed the last two paragraphs of the section, and re-focused the original content in a way that is clear and concise. I also introduced the “Shortboard Revolution”- an era that marks distinct change in shaping innovation, yet was unmentioned in the original section. I have attached the revised section below:

Modern Construction

The beginning of the 1940s marked the introduction of fiberglass resin, which allowed shapers to construct surfboards that were strong, light, and waterproof. ^[6] Furthermore, surfboard shapers began to utilize alternate base materials, including both plastic and polyurethane foam. The addition of the new materials as well as fiberglass gave surfboard shapers more freedom and allowed them to incorporate both fins and rocker design in the construction of surfboards.^[1]

In the 1960s, the design of surfboard began to significantly shrink in size. In the era known as the "Shortboard Revolution", surfboard shapers, most notably George Greenough and Bob McTavish, reduced the length of the surfboard, promoting a higher level of maneuverability. This innovation serves as the foundation for contemporary performance surfing.^[6]

Sources:

As mentioned in the beginning of this post, the original article did not utilize a single in-line citation in any of the sections. Furthermore, a large majority of the sources referenced at the end of the article did not corroborate with the information that was presented in each section. Thus, in terms of revisions, I utilized a combination of both new and old sources to provide each section with ample verification. I have listed the sources utilized below:

- History Of Surfboards: From 150lb/68kg Straight Planks To Modern Quads

- The Fascinating Evolution of the Surfboard

- A Brief History of the Surfboard

- Greg Noll: The Art of the Surfboard

- Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1896

- What is a paipo?

- Ancient Surfboard Style Is Finding New Devotees

Edit Round 4: "Surfboard shaping today" and "How Surfboards are Shaped"

Hello fellow Wikipedians!

For this editing post, I have specified the major revisions that I have made to the article; this post will focus on both the enhancement of the "Surfboard shaping today" section as well as the deletion of the "How Surfboards are Shaped". First, while the information presented in the "Surfboard shaping today" section is both clear and explanatory, the content lacks the inline citations necessary for verification. In terms of revisions for this section, I have incorporated several of the article's original references that adequately verify the majority of the information in the article; however, I would suggest for a more in-depth research to discover references that fully verify the included content, as per