 | This draft does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
I feel that this article is not comprehensive enough. It may not cover all the important aspects of the topic, or it lacks sufficient detail and depth. There is no account of the person's growth experience or a general overview, only some personal achievements are mentioned. Moreover, the article may be too brief in some parts, lacking details, and does not provide enough background information or explanations. This makes it difficult for readers to understand the individual, and it comes across as very thin, to the point where one might wonder why this article is even needed. Kikolipu ( talk) 04:23, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
The article lacks authoritative reference materials, and using the author's Weibo as a reference material is unreliable. The content also lacks verifiability. Each part of the article is too limited, and the author's introduction is not detailed enough. A large amount of supplementary content is needed to avoid readers questioning the authenticity of the article. So I think the article has not yet reached the standard for publication. Further improvement is needed. Zhongxxin ( talk) 04:58, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
| This draft does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
I feel that this article is not comprehensive enough. It may not cover all the important aspects of the topic, or it lacks sufficient detail and depth. There is no account of the person's growth experience or a general overview, only some personal achievements are mentioned. Moreover, the article may be too brief in some parts, lacking details, and does not provide enough background information or explanations. This makes it difficult for readers to understand the individual, and it comes across as very thin, to the point where one might wonder why this article is even needed. Kikolipu ( talk) 04:23, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
The article lacks authoritative reference materials, and using the author's Weibo as a reference material is unreliable. The content also lacks verifiability. Each part of the article is too limited, and the author's introduction is not detailed enough. A large amount of supplementary content is needed to avoid readers questioning the authenticity of the article. So I think the article has not yet reached the standard for publication. Further improvement is needed. Zhongxxin ( talk) 04:58, 20 May 2024 (UTC)