Difference between revisions of "Talk:Alexa Rathi"

From SI410
Jump to: navigation, search
(Added William Babbitt's Review)
 
m
Line 1: Line 1:
Comment from William Babbitt - Hi Alexa, I want to start by saying this was a very interesting wiki page. In particular I thought that the way you broke up the page into your different specific searches was clever and made it easy to follow how you went about researching yourself. I also like your use of bold text in the introduction to point out what your main argument would be for the page. One thing I think you could consider revisiting though is how you approach that argument for the rest of the wiki page. The first part of your argument, about the two version of yourself, is well addressed in the "Decoding Data" section, but the second part about time isn't really touched on again. I think you could change the ending where you talk about privacy laws to reflect on the time aspect of your thesis, or change the thesis to talk about privacy laws and it would better tie the piece together. Also in the bulleted list of versions of yourself under the "Decoding Data" section, you list "who you are biologically" but then don't go on to explain that point. I would have liked to have see that explained further. Overall though I think this is an interesting argument that you are making and it is well formatted.
+
Comment from William Babbitt - Hi Alexa, I want to start by saying this was a very interesting wiki page. You did a good job of overtly addressing the idea of the difference between your online identity and your real identity. You laid our your argument very clearly and made a good effort to back up parts of it. However I do think that you could consider revisiting parts of your argument. For example, the first part of your argument, about the two version of yourself, is well addressed in the "Decoding Data" section, but the second part about time isn't really backed up or mentioned again. If you want to keep this as part of your argument I would consider adding more reflection to touch on it, perhaps in place of the closing section on privacy laws which currently feels a bit out of place. I also think you could drop this part about "time" entirely and expand the other areas of the wiki. From the perspective of the quality of your writing I think this page was quite nice. I appreciated some of the formatting decisions you made such as the use of bold text and the splitting up the "Google Data Dive" section into specific queries. The only thing that stood out to me was in the bulleted list you have a point about "who you are biologically" and then you don't touch on that anywhere else on the page. Overall though I think this was a well done wiki page that addressed all parts of the assignment.

Revision as of 13:46, 24 February 2021

Comment from William Babbitt - Hi Alexa, I want to start by saying this was a very interesting wiki page. You did a good job of overtly addressing the idea of the difference between your online identity and your real identity. You laid our your argument very clearly and made a good effort to back up parts of it. However I do think that you could consider revisiting parts of your argument. For example, the first part of your argument, about the two version of yourself, is well addressed in the "Decoding Data" section, but the second part about time isn't really backed up or mentioned again. If you want to keep this as part of your argument I would consider adding more reflection to touch on it, perhaps in place of the closing section on privacy laws which currently feels a bit out of place. I also think you could drop this part about "time" entirely and expand the other areas of the wiki. From the perspective of the quality of your writing I think this page was quite nice. I appreciated some of the formatting decisions you made such as the use of bold text and the splitting up the "Google Data Dive" section into specific queries. The only thing that stood out to me was in the bulleted list you have a point about "who you are biologically" and then you don't touch on that anywhere else on the page. Overall though I think this was a well done wiki page that addressed all parts of the assignment.