User talk:Dqdolphin/sandbox

Comments
Glad to see you got your proposal up here, Dqdolphin. Hopefully with time in class discussion, you might be able to decide on an appropriate edit. I am looking forward to that. --Jbdolphin (talk) 06:48, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Looks great, you have a really good source to begin with. After taking a cursory look at the talk page on Disinformation, I definitely agree that more contributions to either the article or the talk page is necessary. ApprehensiveAlpaca (talk) 19:59, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Using modern examples will have a great impact on the page, as most of the information available deals with historical applications. Gvkvmg (talk) 20:16, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

More Comments
Before you finalize your edits in your "real" sandbox, I encourage you to consider the following. It would help to know where in the article you imagine this edit will go. So be sure to make that clear. The first line could be made more concise with a clearer focus on disinformation. For example, if you start the sentence with "disinformation" and rephrase from there, it would strengthen that focus. Also, just link the other page to the the words "Ukrainian power grid." Work to be similarly more concise throughout. How can you say more, more directly, with fewer words. Watch out for words like "drastically," which are not very precise. Make what was drastic about this factual. For example, X number of people were without electricity ..."

Finally, be sure to use the Wikipedia format for sources. Nice work! --Jbdolphin (talk) 02:44, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Great job with your proposed edits! These all are contributing very valuable information to the Wikipedia piece. It was a great point to expand the article to encompass more than just details regarding Russian disinformation and tactics used by the KGB. "Modernizing" the piece is certainly a good idea. The Ukranian power grid details are valuable as well. Your citations are clear and your explanations are well thought out. It may be wise to have explanations that are a little less long winded, but I do appreciate explanations with thorough details like yours. Besides trimming down the explanations to be more concise, you are onto something great here! Nice work. --Echoloc8n (talk) 01:06, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

This is a great excerpt but there are some things that I think you could tweak to make it that much better. In the beginning you say "with a large emphasis on disinformation" but I recommend that you go along the lines of "brought on by the spread of disinformation on such a large scale that it created a disastrous effect on the public". Other than that, I think it's pretty good! Alenaley (talk) 20:29, 26 April 2021 (UTC)Alenaley