Talk:Douyu

Nicole Vanderlee: Peer Edit

1. Length: The length of this article is on the shorter end. It would be beneficial to elaborate more on your points. For example, the false advertising section is very interesting, and it would be beneficial to expand. 2. Structure: The structure is good. The article has a good opening paragraph, body paragraphs, and is supported by reliable evidence. It would be beneficial to elaborate on some of the evidence provided by the sources. For example, the intro paragraph mentions Series D funding but does not explain what that is. I think it would help the reader have a better picture of the story if these things were elaborated on. 3. Clarity: Clarity can improve. More needs to be written about the gambling concerns, false advertising, and vulgar content concerns. This should be the focus of the article because it discusses the ethics of the platform. These areas are too sparse and need to have more example of these ethical violations to improve clarity. The paragraph about gambling is well done. The false advertising and vulgar contents paragraphs need more in them to highlight the intersection of technology and ethics on the Douyu platform. The ethical issue needs to be clearer. This will also help with length. 4. POV: This article does a really good job presenting things neutrally. There are no personal opinions stated and the author explains different aspects of the ethical concerns. Additionally, the author does not argue for a specific viewpoint but rather reports the ethical concerns and responses. However, I think more can be added to the final two sections to strengthen the article.