Talk:Data exhaust

Untitled
Peer Review #2 -- Data Exhaust

LEAD Looking at the lead by itself, do I feel satisfied that I know the importance of the topic? Yes, it really describes data exhaust or exhaust data well. It also highlights the importance of the topic - both it’s ability to improve the online experience, but also hinder peoples privacy.

Looking at the lead again after reading the rest of the article, does the lead reflect the most important information? Yes it does

Does the lead give more weight to certain parts of the article over others? Is anything missing? Is anything redundant? No, it’s really neutral. It mentions that there are pros and cons to data exhaust.

Does it have these five elements:

A lead section that is easy to understand - Yes A clear structure - So far there is only medical exhaust data mentioned Balanced coverage - Not as of now Neutral content - Yes, it does a great job of remaining neutral Reliable sources - Yes, their links open

A CLEAR STRUCTURE Are the sections organized well, in a sensible order? So far there is only a paragraph of medical exhaust data mentioned, however the lead is a perfect length Would they make more sense presented some other way (chronologically, for example)? I’m sure as the person adds to it, it will

BALANCING ACT Is each section's length equal to its importance to the article's subject? I’m sure once the person adds to it, it will Are there sections in the article that seem unnecessary? No Is anything off-topic? No

Does the article reflect all the perspectives represented in the published literature? Not yet Are any significant viewpoints left out or missing? I’m sure a lot more will be added

Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view? The person obviously wants to address the issues with data exhaust however they remain neutral which is great  Neutral content

Do you think you could guess the perspective of the author by reading the article? Yes

Are there any words or phrases that don't feel neutral? For example, "the best idea," "most people," or negative associations, such as "While it's obvious that x, some insist that y." “Most medical devices emit some form of exhaust data, such as many pacemakers, dialysis machines, and cameras used during surgery.” But it’s sourced… accurately.

Does the article make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or people? For example, "some people say..." No

Does the article focus too much on negative or positive information? Remember, neutral doesn't mean "the best positive light" or "the worst, most critical light." It means a clear reflection of various aspects of a topic. No

RELIABLE SOURCES

Are most statements in the article connected to a reliable source, such as textbooks and journal articles? Or do they rely on blogs or self-published authors? So far, yes

Are there a lot of statements attributed to one or two sources? If so, it may lead to an unbalanced article, or one that leans too heavily into a single point of view. No

Are there any unsourced statements in the article, or statements that you can't find stated in the references? Just because there is a source listed, doesn't mean it's presented accurately? No

First, what does the article do well? -Describes data exhaust well -Great neutrality so far Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way? “Data exhaust or exhaust data refers to the trail of data left by the activities of an Internet user during his/her online activity.” Simple, yet very clear. I understood right away.

What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? This person is off to a great start, even with just this I see where they’re headed.. they will obviously add more. What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article? I’m excited for this person to complete it, because I would definitely read it all/be interested

Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Let them know! This article really made me want to stay aware of my neutrality. FINALLY.. Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you? Yes/No

Is the article neutral? Are there any claims, or frames, that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? Yes it is neutral

Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? So far no

Check the citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article? So far yes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cassandraartelle (talk • contribs) 04:21, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Cassandraartelle, Fjohnstone96.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Benati junior.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 September 2018 and 18 February 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Moss6.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review
Great start! Your lead clearly defines data exhaust in a straightforward and comprehensive manner. Your use of wikilinks benefited the overall article and added depth to the examples provided. You maintained a neutral tone throughout, which can be challenging when discussing a topic that raises various concerns.

If/once you add more content (such as medical exhaust data), be sure to reference these in the lead section. This will help intrigue the audience from the get-go. Another way to lengthen your article would be adding a solutions section. Providing possible solutions would also help readers understand or reflect upon the impacts of data exhaust. Also be sure to reference any claims you make.

The only other suggestion I have is in regards to writing style. Shorter sentences would make the content easier to understand. The examples that are provided in brackets can be made into their own sentences, which would benefit readability. Furthermore, it would provide more opportunities to cite information.

I can't wait to see the final result! Fjohnstone96 (talk) 07:36, 9 November 2017 (UTC)Fjohnstone96