User talk:Aspat25/Modern Cyber Security

Article Evaluation

Technology_and_society

Hello I will be reviewing this article. Talking about prehistoric technology is distracting because it is not very relevant to the scope of today's technology and its impact on society. This article doesn't get to the point and is too long to be informative. There are also so grammatical mistakes such as where periods go and spacing in the second sub section of "Modern effects and examples." The funding section is too short and not necessary. Most of the other information is up to date and relevant.

The article is neutral and unbiased. The funding part is underrepresented. It is not important but there are few short sentences about it. Either elaborate more on it or cut it out entirely.

There are a lot of sources but they all seem to check out and be legitimate.The information comes from other Wikipedia articles and is unbiased. These seem to be reliable sources. It seems to me that the author is trying to merge older articles and make their own instead of original ideas.

Following WikiProjects are WikiProject Anthropology, WikiProject Sociology, WikiProject Technology. Article rated "start class, high importance".Aspat25 (talk) 22:59, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Potential Article Topic

Effcts of technology in different cultures

Effects of technology on societal class

The biggest technological advancements in human society

Technology in certain time period (Rome, Medival times, Industrial revolution etc.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aspat25 (talk • contribs) 22:59, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Anthony Peer Review

Benjamin Youngberg I am peer reviewing your article.

It is a very short article and I know you will add more to this. Go more into depth of what is causing climate change and the impacts."Universities across the map are all aware of climate issues arising in the modern era due to human impact". More organizations other than Universities know the impact of climate change so change that for a more broader scope. Go more into depth about the technologies helping to reduce carbon emission. Talk about the impact it has on animals because that is a huge biproduct of climate change. Other than that is was a good article. Keep of the good work Ben! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aspat25 (talk • contribs) 19:29, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Anthony's Peer Review

Lead Section

The lead section of the article does a great job at conveying the importance of the subject and while being brief and staying on topic. The lead does a good job at showing what important information will be presented throughout the rest of the article. The information presented in the lead is balanced well with the amount of information presented in each section of the rest of the article.

Structure

There is a very clear structure to the article and it is presented in a sensible order.

Balance

The "Types of attacks" section of the article is balanced and presents all of its information with equal amounts of importance to each other. No part of this section appears to be presented as being more important than any other section which is great. The "How to Decrease Chance of Cyber Attack" section is well balanced and the amount information presented in this section appropriate with its relevance to the rest of the article. Overall I do not see any problems with how this article is balanced.

Neutral Content

The information written in the article is completely neutral and does not appear to be written from a biased viewpoint. The only problem in this area is the line at the end of the lead section that reads "The days of sticking up a bank are over now there are remote attacks to computer and technological systems." This conveys a feeling that cyber attacks are the more important threat to businesses these days. While cyber attacks are more difficult to protect against and can cause serious damage, this does not reduce the threat that physical attacks present and thus should not be regarded as being more important.

Reliable Sources

While there are many links to other Wikipedia articles throughout the article, there are no other reliable sources provided. The only sources provided in the references section are other Wikipedia articles. Other Wikipedia articles do not count as reliable sources on Wikipedia,and so, they cannot be used as a source. If you want to use information from another Wikipedia article, you should consider looking at the sources for that article and seeing if you can find where the information was originally sourced from. You should also consider finding reliable sources for your section "How to Decrease Chance of Cyber Attack." Since this section is definitions and factual information, you should find a reliable source for each definition that you provided. Ryan Whritenour (talk) 14:28, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Anthony Aspat 2 peer review

Hello i am peer reviewing your article.

I enjoyed reading your article, but i hope you will add more details to your article for instance about the impacts of climate change. Their are a lot of people that worry about climate change and trying to fix it. I believe you should go deeper and explain it and show some way to stop it. You can talk about how it effects humans, animals, bugs.