Talk:1 Second Everyday

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on 1 Second Everyday. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140517120325/http://gawker.com/5969389/every-second-of-this-mans-life-is-more-interesting-than-yours to http://gawker.com/5969389/every-second-of-this-mans-life-is-more-interesting-than-yours

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:16, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Evaluation and Suggestion
The reason that I choose this article is that I have heard of it before and I also have used it for a while. So, I think as a user I can better evaluate the objectivity of this article, etc. The background of this article is easy to understand and I feel comfortable with it.

The introduction is very good. The introduction clarifies the topic and makes it clear that the article is centerd on the 1Second Every app. At the same time, the introduction gives a concise and detailed description of the main features of the app and information about the developers.

The content is a bit lacking. The content of the article is relevant to the topic. It introduces the inspiration and funding of the app's creator, the achievements of the app, and how to use it. The content is perfectly in line with the topic and easy to understand. However, there are some problems with the graphics in this article, the editor last updated it in March 2021 and wrote that the app's compatibility mode is for IOS 13.0. But now it's September 2022 and IOS has been updated to 16.0, which means that the information in this article is not the latest information.

The position of this article is neutral and is supported by relevant sources. I looked at every source and they are all credible academic sources. The article layout is clean and the images blend well with the article, and the bolded font makes sense. It is a good article that can be trusted on Wikipedia. Sugar Tian (talk) 08:13, 24 September 2022 (UTC)