Difference between revisions of "Talk:Decentralized Networks"
(Feedback) |
m |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
With the removal of paragraph titles, numbered citation links, and content block you are just shy of 2,900 words (roughly over 2,800 words, but 2,994 words with everything included). If you expand a couple of ideas you should easily be able to reach the word count. One example could be in your “Hardware shortages” paragraph, you could explain why a high end GPU is so sought after by crypto miners compared to gamers (such as being able to make faster computations with crypto). The length for each section felt about the appropriate length for each section, ideas were not cut short and they didn’t drag on or feel irrelevant to the topic.The Wikimedia article also reads very cleanly and it was easy to identify the different sections. | With the removal of paragraph titles, numbered citation links, and content block you are just shy of 2,900 words (roughly over 2,800 words, but 2,994 words with everything included). If you expand a couple of ideas you should easily be able to reach the word count. One example could be in your “Hardware shortages” paragraph, you could explain why a high end GPU is so sought after by crypto miners compared to gamers (such as being able to make faster computations with crypto). The length for each section felt about the appropriate length for each section, ideas were not cut short and they didn’t drag on or feel irrelevant to the topic.The Wikimedia article also reads very cleanly and it was easy to identify the different sections. | ||
| − | + | ||
| + | |||
The Wikimedia article has the 3 major components of a good article. The opening paragraph summarizes decentralized networks, however, I would suggest adding some of the controversies in this paragraph as well besides that it is difficult for third parties to shut decentralized networks down and that they share a common goal. The body paragraphs are neatly and logically laid out. I liked how you defined terms, ideas, and talked about the history of topics before getting to the larger concerns, as this made it easy to follow for someone that is new to the issue. Your statements are mostly backed up by reliable sources , as you reference reliable news outlets, official sites, and scholarly sources. However, you may have missed some citations in some of the earlier paragraphs and missed a dollar value when mentioning the market capitalization of bitcoin. In the “Piracy” section you might also want to change “a spokesperson for a journal publisher” to their name and the name of the publication. Besides that, everything else seems inline. I also liked how the article was split into four sections : introducing the general topic, talking about the notable applications, the security concerns surrounding the topic, and finishing with regulatory efforts. This made it easy to follow along as opposed to a wall of text. In the “BitTorrent” section you also have “Insert picture illustration here”, just thought I would remind you that it’s there before the final edit. | The Wikimedia article has the 3 major components of a good article. The opening paragraph summarizes decentralized networks, however, I would suggest adding some of the controversies in this paragraph as well besides that it is difficult for third parties to shut decentralized networks down and that they share a common goal. The body paragraphs are neatly and logically laid out. I liked how you defined terms, ideas, and talked about the history of topics before getting to the larger concerns, as this made it easy to follow for someone that is new to the issue. Your statements are mostly backed up by reliable sources , as you reference reliable news outlets, official sites, and scholarly sources. However, you may have missed some citations in some of the earlier paragraphs and missed a dollar value when mentioning the market capitalization of bitcoin. In the “Piracy” section you might also want to change “a spokesperson for a journal publisher” to their name and the name of the publication. Besides that, everything else seems inline. I also liked how the article was split into four sections : introducing the general topic, talking about the notable applications, the security concerns surrounding the topic, and finishing with regulatory efforts. This made it easy to follow along as opposed to a wall of text. In the “BitTorrent” section you also have “Insert picture illustration here”, just thought I would remind you that it’s there before the final edit. | ||
| − | + | ||
| + | |||
The ethical issues of Decentralized Networks felt clear to me. This topic deals with the concern that without proper government regulation these peer-to-peer connections can lead to untraceable transactions, crytpo mining leads to higher energy consumption, and online piracy. The writing is very clear and is backed by references for each point. Each section also mentions who or what is affected by these networks such as some people like the anonymity that they receive as they do not trust the intentions of their government. The article also mentions the different actions that have taken effect or are currently being worked on. | The ethical issues of Decentralized Networks felt clear to me. This topic deals with the concern that without proper government regulation these peer-to-peer connections can lead to untraceable transactions, crytpo mining leads to higher energy consumption, and online piracy. The writing is very clear and is backed by references for each point. Each section also mentions who or what is affected by these networks such as some people like the anonymity that they receive as they do not trust the intentions of their government. The article also mentions the different actions that have taken effect or are currently being worked on. | ||
| − | + | ||
| + | |||
The writing is very objective and in no way feels that it is one sided in any fashion. For example, in the “Piracy” section the reader is presented with facts like “Piracy has passed a significant threat to the development of the software industry and the growth of the digital media industry.” instead of being told that piracy is morally impermissible. I also liked how different viewpoints are brought up such as how much energy is needed to run cryptocurrency, and instead of attacking crytpocurrency, research was done to show what is being done to reduce the negative impact it has on the environment. These statements are also clearly backed up resources and never feel like they are fabricated for narrative.I felt that all of the different sections were presented well with information instead of trying to persuade an argument one way or the other. Overall I would say the article is well written! | The writing is very objective and in no way feels that it is one sided in any fashion. For example, in the “Piracy” section the reader is presented with facts like “Piracy has passed a significant threat to the development of the software industry and the growth of the digital media industry.” instead of being told that piracy is morally impermissible. I also liked how different viewpoints are brought up such as how much energy is needed to run cryptocurrency, and instead of attacking crytpocurrency, research was done to show what is being done to reduce the negative impact it has on the environment. These statements are also clearly backed up resources and never feel like they are fabricated for narrative.I felt that all of the different sections were presented well with information instead of trying to persuade an argument one way or the other. Overall I would say the article is well written! | ||
Latest revision as of 09:45, 4 February 2022
With the removal of paragraph titles, numbered citation links, and content block you are just shy of 2,900 words (roughly over 2,800 words, but 2,994 words with everything included). If you expand a couple of ideas you should easily be able to reach the word count. One example could be in your “Hardware shortages” paragraph, you could explain why a high end GPU is so sought after by crypto miners compared to gamers (such as being able to make faster computations with crypto). The length for each section felt about the appropriate length for each section, ideas were not cut short and they didn’t drag on or feel irrelevant to the topic.The Wikimedia article also reads very cleanly and it was easy to identify the different sections.
The Wikimedia article has the 3 major components of a good article. The opening paragraph summarizes decentralized networks, however, I would suggest adding some of the controversies in this paragraph as well besides that it is difficult for third parties to shut decentralized networks down and that they share a common goal. The body paragraphs are neatly and logically laid out. I liked how you defined terms, ideas, and talked about the history of topics before getting to the larger concerns, as this made it easy to follow for someone that is new to the issue. Your statements are mostly backed up by reliable sources , as you reference reliable news outlets, official sites, and scholarly sources. However, you may have missed some citations in some of the earlier paragraphs and missed a dollar value when mentioning the market capitalization of bitcoin. In the “Piracy” section you might also want to change “a spokesperson for a journal publisher” to their name and the name of the publication. Besides that, everything else seems inline. I also liked how the article was split into four sections : introducing the general topic, talking about the notable applications, the security concerns surrounding the topic, and finishing with regulatory efforts. This made it easy to follow along as opposed to a wall of text. In the “BitTorrent” section you also have “Insert picture illustration here”, just thought I would remind you that it’s there before the final edit.
The ethical issues of Decentralized Networks felt clear to me. This topic deals with the concern that without proper government regulation these peer-to-peer connections can lead to untraceable transactions, crytpo mining leads to higher energy consumption, and online piracy. The writing is very clear and is backed by references for each point. Each section also mentions who or what is affected by these networks such as some people like the anonymity that they receive as they do not trust the intentions of their government. The article also mentions the different actions that have taken effect or are currently being worked on.
The writing is very objective and in no way feels that it is one sided in any fashion. For example, in the “Piracy” section the reader is presented with facts like “Piracy has passed a significant threat to the development of the software industry and the growth of the digital media industry.” instead of being told that piracy is morally impermissible. I also liked how different viewpoints are brought up such as how much energy is needed to run cryptocurrency, and instead of attacking crytpocurrency, research was done to show what is being done to reduce the negative impact it has on the environment. These statements are also clearly backed up resources and never feel like they are fabricated for narrative.I felt that all of the different sections were presented well with information instead of trying to persuade an argument one way or the other. Overall I would say the article is well written!
