Difference between revisions of "Talk:Denial of Service Attacks"
(Created page with " Reviewer - Jai Narayanan") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | Your draft is ~1100 words, which satisfies the length requirement of the assignment. Furthermore, you meet the 3 major components of a good article through the usage of an opening paragraph that summarizes Denial of Service Attacks at a high level, a section that takes a deeper look and explores the implications of DDOS, and finally a reference section for all of your relevant sources. Some suggestions I have, is to make the distinction between the intro and body more visually apparent by making the section headers larger, and also to make sure all of your references in the body appropriately link to the reference section. | ||
| + | In addition to structure, your article's clarity is also good. You give a solid, factual explanation of DDOS, and use examples to break down ideas and explain them more clearly. One suggestion is to provide links to other sources that can help explain some of the technical terms you use. For example, for UDP, or cookies, you could provide hyperlinks to other wiki articles so that readers can understand those topics if they are unfamiliar with them better. Additionally, while you do touch on how they are targeted against certain groups and individuals like activists, and politicians, I think it would make sense to explain what the specific implications for those groups are. I think it might also be good to add a section on the future of DDOS and DDOS preventions by using sources that speculate on how attacks might evolve. These are minor suggestions, and based on your unfinished headers, it already seems that you are going to develop on these ideas more. Finally, you do a great job being objective in your article. You use plenty of well reputed sources, and all information is presented objectively. There are no personal opinions used, and this is great for the article. | ||
| − | + | Overall, I think you've done a great job with this draft, and have a very solid starting point for fleshing out the rest of your article. | |
| + | |||
| + | - Jai Narayanan | ||
Latest revision as of 19:43, 3 February 2023
Your draft is ~1100 words, which satisfies the length requirement of the assignment. Furthermore, you meet the 3 major components of a good article through the usage of an opening paragraph that summarizes Denial of Service Attacks at a high level, a section that takes a deeper look and explores the implications of DDOS, and finally a reference section for all of your relevant sources. Some suggestions I have, is to make the distinction between the intro and body more visually apparent by making the section headers larger, and also to make sure all of your references in the body appropriately link to the reference section.
In addition to structure, your article's clarity is also good. You give a solid, factual explanation of DDOS, and use examples to break down ideas and explain them more clearly. One suggestion is to provide links to other sources that can help explain some of the technical terms you use. For example, for UDP, or cookies, you could provide hyperlinks to other wiki articles so that readers can understand those topics if they are unfamiliar with them better. Additionally, while you do touch on how they are targeted against certain groups and individuals like activists, and politicians, I think it would make sense to explain what the specific implications for those groups are. I think it might also be good to add a section on the future of DDOS and DDOS preventions by using sources that speculate on how attacks might evolve. These are minor suggestions, and based on your unfinished headers, it already seems that you are going to develop on these ideas more. Finally, you do a great job being objective in your article. You use plenty of well reputed sources, and all information is presented objectively. There are no personal opinions used, and this is great for the article.
Overall, I think you've done a great job with this draft, and have a very solid starting point for fleshing out the rest of your article.
- Jai Narayanan
