Draft talk:Dear Past Life

Dear Yifan,

Thank you for the interesting topic you are dealing with in which the western and eastern visions face each other in an issue of major importance in our current societies. Nonetheless there are a couple of issues worth to consider:

Since glossaLAB purpose is clarifying concepts, the title is not so appropriate, first because it doesn't help to identify what your dealing with. I think it would be better to call it 'Privacy vs Security'. The heading section - or paragraph(s) - should provide a brief clarification of the concepts involved. A kind of summarial review of the concepts involved that you deal with in the structure of you article.
Because of the clarification purpose you should never through an acronym - even if it's quite well known - if it's not definided first. That's what you do with GDPR and PIPL.
Use please the paragraphs styles for titles (epigraphs) of different level instead of simple bold characters. By doing that a content table that facilitates navigation within your article will be automatically generated. It's very simple: if you use visual editing you can choose it in the tools menu bar; if you use code edition: placing ==, ===, ====, etc at the beginning and ending of an epigraph's text will mark it as title of level 1, 2, 3, etc.
Use the citation tool as well for entering the bibliographic sources. It will create the links automatically and will place the reference list at the end of the page. The only thing you should enter is the title "References".
I think my paper of 2011 "The need for an information system approach to security concerns" (you can find in the documentation section of the permanent website) can be interesting for you. In this article, I review the inherent confrontation between information trust and security, which is very close to the confrontation you are discussing in your contribution. You can even find a hint related to China's history.

As regards the usage given to AI, I have linked the way you declare it, but let me warn you about a couple of details:

Only cite as references those that you have really review and you know the author's intentions. Often AI find correlations that can even correspond to a negative relation with the statement you're allegedly supporting.
The final version shouldn't have the AI's timber, which can be detected. I mean you can use it to improve the grammatic correctness of your expressions, but try to express yourself, don't let AI to express it by you. Use it as a chance to improve your language skills.

Most cordial regards,

José María Díaz Nafría (talk) 15:18, 30 May 2025 (CEST)

Access to the article: Díaz-Nafría (2011). The need for an information system approach. TripleC.