Talk:NIISe
Add topic| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the NIISe article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Peer review
[edit] | This peer review discussion is closed. |
I've listed this article for peer review because I feel like there are a lot of room for improvements however I am clueless on what should be changed.
Thanks, N niyaz (talk) 11:15, 6 April 2026 (UTC)
Comments by AdaCiccone
[edit]Here's what my eyes quickly caught on:
- Some sections are glaringly shorter than others (literally just one or two sentences). That doesn't mean every section has to be the same length but it should carry a similar weight. You should also pay attention that what the section is trying to tell the readers, so again, different sections may be of different length.
- The 'Module' section consists of lists only, and there's no explanation whatsoever about what they mean. A prose work here would make the section better by laying out not only what they mean, but also how they sit and interact within the wider context of the subject.
- I saw an Instagram page being used as a source (I clicked on it and the post seems to have been deleted). I'm not quite sure about this but I don't think this is encouraged within Wikipedia. I'm of the strong belief that a source shouldn't just tell the readers 'hey, this is supported by a source ya know' but should also help explain/dig further about the claim it is supporting.
On what could be improved, the biggest thing in my opinion is starting from the 'ecosystem' part. When I hear that word, I think of something vast with various interconnected variables within it. This should be the aspect the article is built around. Think of user experience, the challenges, what other government agencies think about it, the system's limits (and what the solutions might be), etc Other stuff that the article could expand on:
- A clear development arc from just an idea, to gathering relevant parties, to budget agreements, to technical development, to pre-implementation testing, to trial period, and finally to actual release to the public.
- Why was the system created? Other than the lead section, the article doesn't go further in this.
- Sourcing could be better if non-Malaysian sources are included as well.
So far those were on my mind when I read the article. In a nutshell, it needs proper and controlled expansion while at the same time maintaining a good prose and focus on the subject. AdaCiccone (talk) 11:48, 20 April 2026 (UTC)