User talk:Kotuby/sandbox

Welcome!
Hello, Kotuby, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful: Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! Noyster  (talk),  10:38, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

I don't see anything particular troubling in this article. It seems to be simple enough and citations are there. I don't think picture would in this case make much of a difference so that is ok as well. The only thing that seems a little bit weird is the "Kinds of malware" section which says that something is bad and then the says that the next thing is even worse. I don't exactly know what the word restrictions are but maybe you could work that part over again. Winkert.e (talk) 02:23, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

=Peer review by David Abreu=

First let me say that you start with a great title, which the perfect article praises. Your entry is relatively self-contained, but being technical I can understand why it branches out often when describing technical terms. I like how you used expert knowledge in your citations to draw conclusions. Finally, the Simple English nature of this entry was met with a very clear tone throughout.

I am new to Simple English on Wikipedia, but the following suggestions are being made based on what I've observed in other articles:
 * SE entries in Wikipedia rarely add an overload of information. Variety and extra tid bits seem welcome, but elaborating on one specific section is not done much. Having noticed this, I will try hit some points on it.

One thing to note, is that you very often hyper-link to normal Wikipedia articles inside your Simple English entry. I think this is a huge problem in the SE community, so you may want to try re-link your items to the SE versions of them. This shouldn't be a huge problem. If anything, it may allow you to expand on a couple other SE pages!

Some suggestions

 * "People who write malware also get their programs out "into the wild"... " ~ Into the wild is a very Americanized slang that people learning English may not understand. Perhaps revise it to "People who write malware also get their programs out into other computers.".
 * "can be installed on a computer without the person using the computer knowing about it or wanting it there." ~ I think this was covered in class, and reading over it again, I agree it may be too wordy. It initially makes sense, but could be broken down into two sentences. For example: "can be installed on a computer without the permission of the owner."
 * "drive-by downloading" is interesting. I can't find an instance in another Simple English document where defining a term using the hyper-link is followed be a re-explanation of the word in question. Usually their definition is implied, then hyper-linked in the same implication. It could be changed to the following: When a victim gets malware just by going to a website with the malware hidden on it, and does not click or download anything, this is called a  "drive-by downloading".".

Overall
I enjoyed reading your page and seeing the SE version of Wikipedia in action. Generally I believe you accomplished what we set out to do, but I am afraid that Simple English may have some limitations for you, which can be seen in some of my suggestions above. There is a need for simplification in some areas on your page. Another review may reveal them more for you.

Abrooski (talk) 21:18, 10 November 2014 (UTC)