User talk:Joce Strad/sandbox

Hi Joselyn,

Looks like you’re on the right track with the Wikipedia assignment. I liked how you added a paragraph about journalists and news organizations that talk about the Darknet. It hasn’t been included in the original Darknet article, so you will provide useful additional information.

You already have 9 out of 15 required sources and all of them seem to be trustworthy. You probably should add direct links to the sources in you citations, so it will be easy accessible for the readers. Additionally, your content is natural and the coverage is well balanced and not biased.

Best,

Anastasia

Dear Anastasia, Thank you for your recommendations. I felt that it is interesting and informative to see how a topic is covered in the media, while ensuring that such presentation of the coverage is not bias. I recently found out that there is distinction between the Darknet and the Deep Web, Dark Web, so maybe on either page I could add a line clarifying that distinction. I will also add direct links to the sources, and did so on the main article. Thanks for the feedback!Joce Strad (talk) 15:39, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Made many of the changes suggested in my Peer Reviews: Increasing Links, beginning to add content to second article, ect. Made many hyperlinks on the Dark Web page to the appropriate Wiki pages. (Dark web) Made a line with reference to two sources explaining the difference between the Darknet and the Deepweb. "Darknet is often confused with the Deep Web (or Deep net). While the Deep web is reference to any site that cannot be accessed through a traditional search engine, the Dark net is then a small and classified portion of the Deep Web that has been intentionally hidden and is inaccessible through standard browsers.[10][11]" Added this clarification paragraph to both pages.Joce Strad (talk) 14:15, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jocelyn,

The proposed edits seem to be on par with what is expected; even ahead of schedule I would say. Good job adding a new relevant section about important authors and and adding necessary sources to reinforce existing work. You use a wikipedian tone and keep an unbiased point of view throughout all of your work. There were very few grammatical changes I would make, and merely cosmetic changes. Your work should also hyperlink to other existing wikipedia articles. I look forward to seeing the finished product!

One thing I would suggest looking into is the Darknet page, it seems to be pretty short and slightly irrelevant. Maybe it can be blended with the Dark Web page.

Very good work,

Timothy Zootberg (talk) 20:30, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Timothy,

Thank you for your recommendations. I recently found out that there is distinction between the Darknet and the Deep Web, Dark Web, so maybe on either page I could add a line clarifying that distinction. Essentially the Darknet is the overarching umbrella and more easily accessible than the Deep Web. I originally though they were the same thing as well, so maybe it will best serve both pages to add clarification on that front. I will go back and begin hyperlinking things! Thanks for the feedback!Joce Strad (talk) 15:39, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Made many of the changes suggested in my Peer Reviews: Increasing Links, beginning to add content to second article, ect. Made many hyperlinks on the Dark Web page to the appropriate Wiki pages. (Dark web) Made a line with reference to two sources explaining the difference between the Darknet and the Deepweb. "Darknet is often confused with the Deep Web (or Deep net). While the Deep web is reference to any site that cannot be accessed through a traditional search engine, the Dark net is then a small and classified portion of the Deep Web that has been intentionally hidden and is inaccessible through standard browsers.[10][11]" Added this clarification paragraph to both pages.Joce Strad (talk) 14:15, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]