User talk:Oalynch/sandbox

Jazmyn Pandy's Peer Review
The introduction was strong and the added definitions was a good addition. However, i do believe the audience would benefit from examples of countries with anti-money and terror financing laws. I think it was important to emphasize the difference between money laundering and terrorist financing. Other examples of therriots organizations besides the United States was also a good addition. Wikipedia marked the article as being biased and i agree. Though the suspicious activity is a good edition and very informative, it needs more diversity. All the focus is on the United States. I would like to read more about what other countries consider suspicious. Especially because determining whether such activity or a particular act is related to terrorism or to organized crime. It is a complex situation that could use more information. After all, the topic is general. That section also needs some citations. Without the citations, it does not quite look like original work. Perhaps some more paraphrasing would help. Wikipedia has already detected where additional citations should be.They also marked the article as being vague. I must disagree with it being vague. Some aspects could use a bit more detail ( which i have mentioned before).Due to the audience being so broad, it is important to relate to them. This article shows much more than the general idea of terrorist financing. Overall the main issue in this article is the lack of diversity. Other than that, this article is substantial. Griffyn1987 (talk) 18:45, 12 March 2019 (UTC)