User:ODSez/Tik Tok/Eapostle Peer Review

Peer review
This is where you will complete your peer review exercise. Please use the following template to fill out your review.

General info

 * Hi ODSez - My name is Eapostle (Elena) and I am reviewing your work on Tik Tok.
 * TikTok

Lead

 * This article contains a lot of information and was very informative


 * There is a lot of content - it can be more concise
 * The introduction can definitely be consolidated
 * There are a ton of sources that are cited throughout this article which is great

Content

 * This article focuses on the evolution of Tik Tok which I found the most informative - learned new things about Tik To dating back to 2018
 * Discusses Tik Tok in China and India which addresses Wikipedias gaps
 * Thorough and sources are cited - but could be consolidated as could the introduction like mentioned above.

Tone and Balance
Guiding questions:


 * I think that the claims of why Tik Tok was banned in certain countries seem slightly biased. You might want to look further into this as well as potentially how it is worded.

Sources and References
Guiding questions:


 * The sources are current
 * The sources seem relevant to the topic and that they are for the most part up to date
 * Since Tik Tok is a relatively new platform within the past few years, all of the articles, etc. on it is pretty up to date in general

Organization
Guiding questions:


 * I did not notice any grammatical errors
 * As mentioned earlier this could definitely be written more concisely - many comments were repetitive

Images and Media

 * There are relevant images on this page and relevant captions as well
 * The pictures help tell the story of the platform and where it originated

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?
 * 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?
 * Does the article link to other articles so it is more discoverable?

Overall impressions
Guiding questions:


 * Has the content added improved the overall quality of the article - i.e. Is the article more complete?
 * What are the strengths of the content added?
 * How can the content added be improved?