Talk:TikTok Review

Yuki119808 (talk) 05:59, 11 May 2020 (UTC) Lead

Guiding questions:

Has the Lead been updated to reflect the new content added by your peer? Yes. Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic? Yes, there is an introductory sentence. Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections? There is. Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article? No, there isn't. Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed? No. Lead evaluation 5/5 Content

Guiding questions:

Is the content added relevant to the topic? Yes It is. Is the content added up-to-date? It is. Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong? No, there isn't. Content evaluation 5/5 Tone and Balance

Guiding questions:

Is the content added neutral? The content is neutral. Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? No it seems like neutural to me. Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented? It think it looks normal to me. Does the content added attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another? No. Tone and balance evaluation 5/5 Sources and References

Guiding questions:

Is all new content backed up by a reliable secondary source of information? They are. Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic? They are thorough, really detailed work. Are the sources current? The sources are current. Check a few links. Do they work? The links are working fine. Sources and references evaluation 5/5 Organization

Guiding questions:

Is the content added well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read? It is clear and really understandble. Does the content added have any grammatical or spelling errors?b v I do not see one while I was reading. Is the content added well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic? Could be improved. Try to organize it a little more. Organization evaluation 4/5 Images and Media

Guiding questions: If your peer added images or media

Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic? Yes, there are screen shots of the app. Are images well-captioned? They are. Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations? Seems like to be legit. Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way? This section could be improved if you move your pictures to the right instead of on the left. Images and media evaluation 4/5 For New Articles Only

If the draft you're reviewing is a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.

Does the article meet Wikipedia's Notability requirements - i.e. Is the article supported by 2-3 reliable secondary sources independent of the subject? How exhaustive is the list of sources? Does it accurately represent all available literature on the subject? Yes. Does the article follow the patterns of other similar articles - i.e. contain any necessary infoboxes, section headings, and any other features contained within similar articles? Yes, I see infoboxes, section readings and also pictures. Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable? No, this could be improved, if you add more content. New Article Evaluation 4.5/5 Overall impressions

Guiding questions:

Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete? As a introdution to the app, if I have not use it before, I would know the app quickly and efficiently. What are the strengths of the content added? They are easily to understand and the information are thorough. How can the content added be improved? I stated them in the sections above. Overall evaluation 4.5/5Italic text