Difference between revisions of "Talk:Emily Wang"

Revision as of 19:00, 22 November 2012

First Comment - Pavel Borisov

Content

Including early internet presence is a good idea that I wish I had included in my own avatar page, and I like how the section clearly outlines privacy as a concern for you. Overall the content is a bit clinical and matter-of-fact. I think that there is room for improvement in discussing how the different profile components reflect your values as well as your relationship with your profile. I would especially elaborate further on why and how your portrayal on Facebook is true to yourself. However, I also believe that the current state of the content functions well as a statement that confirms what you've described about yourself as carefully limiting what information about yourself you put online to the factual and professional, even to those who you may be acquaintances or friends with.

Writing Quality

Formatting

I do not get the impression that the illustrations help present the profile well. The Audem Designs one is very clear at displaying your company as something part of your identity, but I feel like it would have best accompanied discussion about much you separate or intertwine your main profile with Audem information. On the whole, the visuals used do not further points of discussion very well. This is partly due to the lack of content, but they could be tied in better.

Style

Spelling is fine. The writing style goes beyond neat and instead edges into being overly sparse and clinical. You may want to consider omitting the birthdate in the first paragraph as it is already in the info template on the right, while still adding additional content. The captions on the illustrations can be used to better convey information about your profile and tie them into the discussion.

Summary

Given the confusion surrounding the assignment, I think that this was good. However, I think there is definitely room for improvement in both the style and content.

Second Comment - Aidan Brewster

I have to admit I did like the general voice of the writing here; it presents a "narrator" point-of-view that I found endearing at first. However, the one flaw this ends up presenting is that there does not exist a particularly deep delving into any of the questions posed by the assignment. There are many spots in the page where I think these questions are put forth, such as why you choose to display the relationship status you do rather than your "true" relationship status, etc. Pavel (above) considers this "clinical", and I find this is often a fitting description of the tone. Too often I found it skimming over things and instead listing facts, when there was plenty of deep analysis available, even just at the surface. If Audem Design is something that is "one of the most important things to her, [...] displayed throughout [your] profile through links and photos of [your] design work", then I'd love to hear about why you want to stress that as an external representation of yourself! Additionally, I think there is plenty of analysis to be made in the privacy and ethics section. Why is it that you are careful to hide old photos and videos? What does this say about you, or for that matter, anyone who chooses to do this?

In the end, I think the formatting was very appealing, and you used a variety of images that were well-placed and appealing. The infobox in the top right of the page was also a nice touch, and helped make the overall presentation more impressive. I can tell a lot of work went into the final page, but I wish I got to read more about why you think you have made the choices you have on social media networks.

All in all, though, well done.