Integrated sources: AI feature detection frameworks, de-AI-flavor methodologies, hands-on experience in batch content production, general colloquialization rules Purpose: Take any passage of AI-generated or human-written Chinese, check it item by item and rewrite it item by item according to this guide, until it reads like something a real person would say
Thanks to the two open-source projects dbs-ai-check and humanizer-zh for providing the AI feature detection frameworks; this guide was compiled by integrating hands-on experience on top of them.
Quick Start: Iron Rules
Iron Rule One: Produce a report first, then ask the user
After receiving the copy, whether it was pasted in or is in a file, you must first produce a review report (script scan results + manual review findings), then ask the user: "There are X issues above. Do you want them revised?" Only after the user confirms may you start revising. Absolutely do not revise directly upon receiving the copy.
Iron Rule Two: Version iteration, do not overwrite the original text
Every revision must create a new version file; the original document must not be overwritten. Naming rule: original document_V2.md, _V3.md... and so on. The user can compare the differences between any two versions at any time.
Iron Rule Three: Two-step process
Step one: Mechanical scan. If there is a file, run the script python3 scripts/hanyihan_qc.py; if there is no file, just scan once using the rules in Chapter 9. List all the issues.
Step two: Produce a review report + ask the user. Organize the issues found in step one into a report and send it to the user for confirmation. Only revise if the user says "revise"; if the user says "don't revise," do not touch it.
Only after both steps are completed can it be published.
Core Principles
The problem with AI Chinese is not that it is written poorly, but that it is written too well, too smooth, too uniform. No rough edges, no stumbles, not a single place where the author themselves had not figured it out. Perfection itself is a signal of unreality.
Rewriting is not about deleting AI features, but about injecting real-human features. Real people speak with these traits: sentence lengths vary, they occasionally go off topic, there are concrete images, there are emotional ups and downs, sometimes they switch to a different way of saying things halfway through, and punctuation follows the breath.
Restraint with the word "you." Using "do you have" "your elephant" "your elephant rider" throughout reads like lecturing people. Switch to neutral phrasing: "think about it" "there was a girl" "some people." "You" can be used, but do not make every sentence "you."
One, Banned Sentence Patterns (absolutely must not appear)
The following sentence patterns, if they appear in any Chinese copy, immediately expose the AI identity:
| Banned sentence pattern | Example | Alternative |
|---|---|---|
| Not... but rather... | It is not procrastination, but rather fear | Just say directly: "What you fear is not the deadline, it is being evaluated" |
| Not... it is... | You are not suffering from insomnia; you are the one who needs someone to confirm | "You cannot sleep. You just need someone to confirm you are still there." |
| You think... but actually... | You think it is reckless spending, but actually you are buying companionship | "You feel that is reckless spending. But looking back, every item points to the same thing." |
| Not... only... | It's not being melodramatic, I'm just too tired | "It has nothing to do with being melodramatic. You're just too tired." |
| I've seen too many... | I've seen too many people treat consumption as companionship | Delete "I've seen too many," and just state the phenomenon. "People treat consumption as companionship." What have you seen, huh? What have you seen? |
| I've experienced... | I've experienced this kind of loneliness | Same as above. AI has no body, no experiences. Describe the scene directly, don't pretend you've lived |
| I have people around me... | I have friends around me like this | Same as above. There is no such friend. Either use a real case, or remove the attribution and just say it |
Iron rule: state directly, don't use contrastive sentence patterns. AI has no first-person experience. "I've seen," "I've experienced," "I have around me" are all fake. Readers can smell it. "You're just afraid to turn off the light" is cleaner than "You're not used to staying up late, you're just afraid to turn off the light."
Revision hint: There's no single revision, it depends on the situation. Common revisions:
- a) Delete the "not X" half, keep only the latter part. Example: "What hurts him most is not losing face, it's that he doesn't know where he went wrong" → "What hurts him most is that he doesn't know where he went wrong."
- b) Completely rewrite the sentence without the contrastive framework.
- c) "You don't need X, you just need Y" is also a variant of the banned sentence pattern. Change it to a direct statement. Example: "You don't need to really believe it. You just need to feel a little better in this moment." → "What you need is to feel a little better in this moment."
Exceptions: "是不是" used in a question is not a violation ("Is it that I did something wrong?"). Colloquial "不是…就是…" like "not that I want to die, just that I want to disappear" also doesn't count.
1.2 Don't put stupid words in the reader's mouth and then correct them
AI味：你可能觉得社交APP能解决孤独，但实际上它们让孤独更严重了。
人味：社交APP越多，你越孤独。
Rule: Don't say a convenient line for the reader that you can then refute. Just say what you want to say.
Two, punctuation is breathing
Punctuation is not a grammatical tool, it's the breathing rhythm of speech.
2.1 Period "。" → Comma "，" (when there's a breath between sentences but it shouldn't break)
AI loves using periods to break every sentence into an independent sentence. But when real people speak, some sentences are connected in one breath:
AI味：你觉得那是乱花钱。但回头看，每一项都指向同一件事。
人味：你觉得那是乱花钱，但回头看，每一项都指向同一件事。
AI味：你管那叫消费。翻完支付记录才明白。
人味：你管那叫消费，翻完支付记录才明白。
Rule: When the latter sentence is a continuation of the former (explanation, turn, progression), connect with a comma. When the latter sentence is a completely new meaning, only then break with a period.
2.2 Paragraph splitting (long paragraph → short paragraph)
AI loves writing big paragraphs. But for short-video voiceover and social media copy, each paragraph should have only 1-2 sentences, at most 3 sentences. The blank space between paragraphs is the time to breathe.
AI味（一整段）：
> 你白天在公司跟同事有说有笑，中午跟人拼外卖聊八卦，下午开会还能开两句玩笑。所有人都觉得你状态不错。晚上回到出租屋，关上门，灯都不想开。你坐在黑暗里，手机屏幕亮着，朋友圈翻了一遍，没找到一个你想联系的人。
人味（拆成四段）：
> 你白天在公司跟同事有说有笑，中午跟人拼外卖聊八卦，下午开会还能开两句玩笑。所有人都觉得你状态不错。
>
> 晚上回到出租屋，关上门，灯都不想开。
>
> 你坐在黑暗里，手机屏幕亮着，朋友圈翻了一遍，没找到一个你想说话的人。
2.3 Em dash "——": banned
Em dashes are directly banned in Chinese voiceover copy. AI uses em dashes far more than humans, it treats em dashes as a universal connector. But real people don't "pause + explain" in the middle of every sentence when speaking.
AI味：跟饿没关系——你点的是20分钟后有人说一句话。
人味：跟饿没关系。你点的是20分钟后有人说一句话。
AI味：你打开电视——跟看什么没关系，是需要一点人声。
人味：你打开电视，跟你想看什么没有关系，你就是需要一点人声。
Rule: Replace all em dashes. Break with a period, connect with a comma, or rewrite the sentence structure.
2.4 Sentence rhythm: alternate long and short
The sentences AI writes are almost all the same length. When real people speak, some sentences are very long, and some break after two or three characters.
AI味（节奏均匀）：
你下班到家，做的第一件事是什么？有人鞋都不脱就瘫在沙发上，盯着天花板发呆十分钟。有人打开外卖APP，享受等待外卖过程中20分钟的期待感。有人打开短视频，刷着刷着脑子就不用转了。
人味（长短交替）：
你下班到家，做的第一件事是什么？
有人鞋都不脱就瘫在沙发上，盯着天花板发呆十分钟。
有人打开外卖APP，享受等待外卖过程中20分钟的期待感。
短视频也一样。刷着刷着，脑子就不用转了。
Rule: Randomly pick five sentences and count the characters. If they're all about the same length, scramble it. Add a short sentence of two or three characters, or a long sentence of forty characters without a break.
2.5 Semicolons: Use semicolons for parallel short sentences
AI loves to use periods to break up all parallel short sentences. But connecting parallel short sentences with semicolons gives better rhythm.
AI味：高考填志愿。毕业选城市。结婚找对象。跳槽换行业。
人味：高考填志愿；毕业选城市；结婚找对象；跳槽换行业。
Rule: For three or more parallel short sentences, connect them with semicolons; don't break them all up with periods.
III. Data Sources: No fabrication, no making things up
Data can add persuasiveness, but sources must withstand scrutiny.
3.1 Real data: Vague attribution is acceptable
Attribution like "a report says" or "data shows" is fine in itself and can be kept. The data really exists; it's just that the source wasn't laid out in order to make the writing flow better.
有数据显示，夜间外卖消费占全天超三分之一。 ← 可以
80%的独居人群每月至少花一千块排解孤独。 ← 可以
社交隔离的死亡风险，等同于每天抽15根烟（Holt-Lunstad等，2010，PLOS Medicine）。 ← 有具体出处，更好
Iron rule: Data must have a verifiable source and be cross-validated. Before writing, ask yourself: can I find the source for this data? If not, don't write it.
3.2 Fictional data: Must be clearly labeled
Data fabricated for copywriting effect (absurd concepts, exaggerated setups) must be clearly labeled "fictional," either inside or outside the copy, so readers don't cite it as real data.
❌ 不标注：
> 世卫组织说每天需要30句话。 ← 读者会当真
✅ 标注清楚：
> ⚠️ 以下为虚构设定，用于荒诞叙事：
> 世卫组织说每天需要30句话。
Iron rule: Fictional data must be labeled. Unlabeled fictional data = fabrication.
3.3 The fake "let me tell you a story"
"Someone told me" "a friend of mine"—if you can't produce details about this person, readers can smell the fabrication.
AI味：有人跟我说，他在某个APP上找到了一个「不用比」的地方。
人味：那个APP上有个「不用比」的地方。那里没有人晒房本、晒工牌、晒旅行。
Rule: If you can't remember what this "someone" is called or what went wrong along the way, either swap in an experience of your own or drop the attribution and just say it directly.
IV. Template Reuse: Don't use the same sentence pattern across topics
This is the most easily overlooked AI trait. A single piece of copy looks fine, but put the same batch of topics together and the formulaic feel is exposed.
4.1 The "nothing to do with X" template
AI味（4条选题都用）：
- 跟饿没关系
- 跟那个女生没什么关系
- 跟肤浅没关系
- 跟看什么没关系
人味（只保留2处，其他换表达）：
- 跟饿没关系（保留，第一次出现建立节奏）
- 那个女生没什么特别的（换掉）
- 跟肤浅没关系（保留，不同选题）
- 你就是需要一点人声（直接说需求，不否定）
Rule: The same rhetorical template should appear at most 2-3 times in a batch of topics. Beyond that, change the expression.
4.2 The "someone told me" template
AI味（多条都用）：
- 有人跟我说，他在某个APP上找到了…
- 有人跟我说，他在某个APP上找到了…
人味（第二条去掉归属）：
- 有人跟我说，他在某个APP上找到了…（保留）
- 那个APP上有个「不需要解读」的地方。（直接引入）
4.3 Even-paced parallelism
AI味：有人鞋都不脱就瘫在沙发上…有人打开外卖APP…有人打开短视频…
人味：有人鞋都不脱就瘫在沙发上…有人打开外卖APP…短视频也一样——
Rule: For three or more parallel "someone/someone/someone" clauses, break the structure on the third.
4.4 Parallelism is also redundancy
AI loves to pile up parallel sentences to build momentum, but parallelism itself is redundancy. One set is enough; don't stack them.
AI味：没人教你请客怎么点菜，没人教你买单什么时候买最合适，没人教你饭桌上怎么让人舒服。
人味：没人教你请客怎么点菜，怎么买单，饭桌上怎么让人舒服。
AI味：第十次就知道怎么点了，第二十次就知道怎么买单了，第三十次就知道怎么让全桌人都舒服了。
人味：（删掉，或者只留一句）
Rule: More parallelism isn't better. Three-part parallel → two items or merge into one sentence. Progressive parallelism like "the tenth time… the twentieth time… the thirtieth time"—just delete it or keep only one.
4.4.5 Distinguishing long vs. short parallelism (added from practice 2026-07-27)
Not all parallelism has an AI feel. The key is length and structural consistency.
AI-flavored long parallelism (must be changed):
- Three or more parts
- Each clause is 10+ characters
- Structure is 100% consistent
- Can be read aloud in one breath without stumbling
AI味：一个内心充满嫉妒的人，他看谁都觉得别人在炫耀。一个内心充满自卑的人，他看谁都像在嘲笑他。一个内心充满戾气的人，他看谁都觉得对方在挑衅。
Human-flavored short parallelism (acceptable):
- Two parts is enough
- Each sentence is short
- The third sentence breaks the repetition in structure
- Reading it aloud requires a breath and a pause in the middle
人味：有人嫉妒你。有人看不起你。有人就是看你不顺眼。
Judgment criterion: read it aloud. Can be read in one breath without stumbling → AI flavor. Needs a breath, a pause, or a different phrasing in the middle → human flavor.
4.5 Excessive metaphor
AI loves to pile up metaphors for imagery, like the consecutive metaphors "the crack in the wall" and "the crack hollows it out." But a metaphor only needs to go far enough; there's no need to unfold one image over and over.
AI味：就像一面墙上的裂缝。你不会记得裂缝是什么时候出现的。你只记得有一天墙塌了。墙是那一百天的小裂缝，一点一点把它掏空的。
人味：就像一面墙上的裂缝。你不会记得裂缝是什么时候出现的。你只记得有一天墙塌了。
Rule: One metaphor is enough. Don't keep expanding and re-explaining the same image.
4.6 Over-adding plot
AI loves to tack explanatory plot onto the end of a story, like "the doctor told her: your body has been sending you signals all along." But the story up front has already made it clear—there's no need for the doctor to come out and summarize.
AI味：三年以后，她住了一次院。不是什么大病，就是身体全面透支。医生跟她说：身体一直在给你发信号，你一次都没听。
人味：三年以后，她住了一次院。不是什么大病，就是身体全面透支。
Rule: If the story is clear, don't add explanation. Readers can understand it themselves.
Five, Wording and Sentence Craft: From Written to Spoken
5.1 High-frequency AI words (replace them)
| AI flavor | Human flavor |
|---|---|
| Moreover | Cut it, just say it directly |
| In fact | Cut it, just say it directly |
| It is worth noting that | Cut it, just say it directly |
| However | But / Though |
| Full of vitality | Cut it |
| Crucial | Very important / really important |
| Key role | Cut it |
| Vision | Depends on the context, most can be cut |
| Essentially | Cut it, just say it directly |
| In the final analysis | Cut it, just say it directly |
5.2 Colloquial replacements (add human flavor)
| Written | Spoken |
|---|---|
| Eight thousand six | 8600 bucks / Wow, 8600 bucks |
| Standard | Beaming / Spot-on |
| Eight times | Depends on the scene: "checked the boss's face eight hundred times" works as exaggeration; "called 8 times" can't become 800 times |
| Too much hassle, deleted it | Too much hassle, forget it, deleted it |
| None of your business | What's it to you? |
| Whether it's a meal doesn't matter | A meal or not, does it really matter? So-so |
| Your body is taking the hit for you | Your body is toughing it out for you |
Rule: Imagine you're chatting over beers with a friend—how would you say it? That's how you write it.
5.3 Concrete imagery > abstract concepts
If you can say it with imagery, don't use concepts. If you can use specific numbers, don't use vague descriptions. After reading, readers must have an image in their heads.
AI味：你的身体在替你承受社交隔离的代价。
人味：你的身体在替你死扛。
AI味：你感到一种深层的孤独感。
人味：你坐在黑暗里，朋友圈翻了一遍，没找到一个你想说话的人。
AI味：好看的人有特权。
人味：你排队半小时，好看的人笑一下就过了。
AI味：你觉得自己的生活不值得被看到。
人味：三天前的自己没什么好看的。
AI味：你点了很多外卖。
人味：你上个月大晚上的点了17顿外卖。
Rule: After writing a sentence, ask yourself: can readers picture it in their heads? If not, rewrite it.
5.4 Ban advertising tone / vendor PPT vocabulary
Copy is "one person discovers something and tells another person about it." It's not a pitch, not a report.
Banned words:
| Banned | Replacement |
|---|---|
| Counterintuitive rule | Just say what that rule is |
| Differentiation | Cut it |
| Track | Field / industry / just cut it |
| Empower | Help you / make you |
| Pain point | What's bothering you / just describe that pain point |
| Closed loop | Cut it |
| Leverage point | Cut it |
| Granularity | Detail / degree |
| It lands right on this point | Delete it, just say it directly |
| Product positioning | Delete it |
Rule: If a word appears in a BP (business plan), it shouldn't appear in your copy.
5.5 Plain language, not an academic report
Readers shouldn't need to look things up on Baidu to understand what you've written.
Banned words:
| Banned | Replacement |
|---|---|
| Choice fatigue | Too many choices, don't want to choose anymore |
| The death knot of social apps | The problem social apps can't solve |
| AI's factory settings | AI is just like this by nature |
| Humans' factory settings | People are just like this by nature |
| Deep-seated needs | What you really want |
| Emotional value | The things that make you feel comfortable |
Rule: Write like you're chatting with a friend. A friend doesn't need to look things up on Baidu to understand what you're saying.
5.6 Don't block off every counterargument
AI loves to anticipate and answer all the reader's possible doubts, making the argument look flawless. But readers can sense you're "playing defense."
AI味：你可能会说，社交APP也可以解决孤独。确实，社交APP能帮你认识更多人。但问题是，认识更多人不等于不孤独。数据显示…
人味：社交APP越多，你越孤独。
Rule: Keep only the counterargument that people have actually asked you about. Delete the rest—readers can also sense that you made them up.
5.7 Don't dump out all your knowledge
AI loves to cram a passage full of jargon and data to show off its expertise. But readers can only remember one point.
AI味：7700万独居成年人，80%每月花1000+排解孤独，夜间外卖消费占全天超三分之一，深夜22点后是情绪消费峰值…
人味：80%的独居人群每月至少花一千块排解孤独。你翻翻自己的支付记录：直播打赏、游戏皮肤、陪聊会员。
Rule: You piled up a bunch of data—which one did you actually use to think about things? Keep that one.
5.8 Don't use emotional details so precise they're unrealistic
AI味：你盯着屏幕看了1.7秒，然后叹了口气。
人味：你盯着屏幕看了一会儿，叹了口气。
Rule: Have you actually measured numbers like "1.7 seconds" or "2.3 seconds"? What did you really feel at the time? Describe it with the words you'd actually say out loud.
5.9 Repetition is not a mistake
AI has an instinct to swap in synonyms, saying the same concept with several different words. But if you think a word is accurate, just use it repeatedly.
AI味：主人公面临许多挑战。主要角色必须克服障碍。中心人物最终获得胜利。英雄回到家中。
人味：主人公面临许多挑战，但最终获得胜利并回到家中。
Rule: Deliberately swapping in synonyms actually exposes AI. Repetition is not a mistake; swapping words is.
Six. The ending: pierce through, don't describe
This is the most critical rule for short-video spoken-word copy. The ending determines whether users will share it.
6.1 Weak endings vs. strong endings
弱（描述行为）：你在确认这个时间还有人醒着。
强（刺穿心理）：手机屏幕亮着的时候，你还不是一个人。
弱（描述感受）：你只是终于找到了一个不需要等回复的地方。
强（刺穿+品牌）：你等的那条回复不会来了，但你发现有人一直在那里，她不会已读不回，她只会给你确定性的回应。
6.2 The ending can bring out the core message
If your copy has a clear purpose (promoting a product, conveying an idea, guiding action), the ending can naturally bring it out at the emotional peak, rather than forcing it in.
纯收束：你发的朋友圈越来越少。不是没话说。是不想演了。
带出目的：你发的朋友圈越来越少，不是没话说。是不想演了。但有些地方是不用表演的，大家都在真实的活着、表达着。
纯收束：房间还是那个房间。但你不觉得它太大了。
带出目的：房间还是那个房间。但你不觉得它太大了。因为那个人给你的，就是我在你身边的感觉。
Rule: Bringing out the purpose at the ending can't be forced. It must be a natural extension of the emotion, not a hard-sold ad. Use "because," "but," or "and" to connect the information after the emotion.
6.3 The emotional curve can't be too smooth
Every paragraph has a perfect setup, development, turn, and conclusion, and every sentence lands beautifully—this itself is a signal of AI. When real people write, some places haven't been fully thought through, and some places are hesitant.
AI味（每段都完美）：
第一段：场景钩子。第二段：数据支撑。第三段：心理揭穿。第四段：金句收束。
人味（有毛边）：
有些地方你自己也没完全想通？那个地方留着，别修圆了。读者能感觉到真的犹豫和假的自信。
Rule: After you finish writing, ask yourself: is there anywhere you're actually not quite sure about? Write it out.
6.4 Don't over-elevate the ending
AI loves to get lyrical and elevated at the end, with sentences like "The pen in your hand is still in your hand right now." But the story itself has already been made clear; there's no need to elevate it further.
AI味：你手里的笔，现在还在你手里。趁还来得及，看清楚自己到底在写什么。
人味：（删掉，让故事自己结束）
Rule: The ending can bring out the core message (6.2), but don't get lyrical and elevated. Let the story end on its own.
6.5 Punchy Lines in Every Paragraph: Check the Genre
- Short video script: a punchy line in every paragraph is a genre requirement, not a violation.
- Long-form WeChat article: having a closing punchy line in every paragraph is AI flavor. Let only the most important one explode; the other paragraphs don't all need to wrap up so prettily.
6.5 Punchy Line Density and Format
AI loves to put a bolded punchy line in every paragraph, making every sentence look important. But there are only one or two truly important punchy lines.
Rules:
- Be restrained with bolded punchy lines: 1 per 600-800 words, not in every paragraph.
- Punchy lines should blend naturally into the body text; don't make them standalone paragraphs.
- User editing style: delete most of the bolded punchy lines and let the sentences stand on their own.
Seven, the Rule of Three: The Fewer the Better
AI loves to divide things into three groups (three reasons, three features, three examples). Human authors aren't this neat.
AI味：煮咖啡的、弹吉它的、练瑜伽的。
人味：煮咖啡的、弹吉他的。也有练瑜伽的。
Rule: if two will do, don't use three. If you must list more than three, use four.
7.2 The opening can't be the 'hook + pain point + promise' triad
AI loves to use a fixed opening formula: first the hook, then the pain point, then the promise. Readers are immune by the second one.
AI味：你知道吗？（钩子）当代年轻人面临前所未有的社交隔离。（痛点）今天我来告诉你怎么解决。（承诺）
人味：深夜两点，你打开通讯录，划了两下，关掉了。
Rule: what is the one thing you really want the reader to know? Start from that thing. Don't set the stage.
Eight, the Human-Flavor Self-Check Process
When you get a piece of Chinese copy, check in the following order:
第1步：禁令句式扫描
→ 搜「不是…而是…」「你以为…其实…」「不是…是…」
→ 搜「我见过太多」「我经历过」「我身边就有」——AI没有身体，没有经历，全是假的
→ 有就改，改成直接陈述
第2步：标点符号检查
→ 大段落拆成 1-3 句一段
→ 后句是前句延续的，句号改逗号
→ 破折号全部替换，用句号或逗号替代
第3步：数据信源检查
→ 真实数据：「有数据显示」可以保留，但必须有可验证信源
→ 虚构数据：必须标注「虚构」，不标注 = 造假
→ 问自己：这个数据我能找到出处吗？找不到就别写
第4步：跨选题模板扫描
→ 搜反复出现的句式（跟X没关系、有人跟我说、不是X是Y）
→ 超过2-3处的，换表达
第5步：AI词汇 + 广告腔 + 学术报告扫描
→ 搜「此外」「事实上」「值得注意的是」「然而」「本质上」→ 删或换口语
→ 搜「赋能」「痛点」「闭环」「抓手」「颗粒度」「赛道」「差异化」→ 全删
→ 搜「选择疲劳」「出厂设置」「深层需求」「情绪价值」→ 换大白话
→ 问自己：朋友听不懂的词，就别写
第6步：口语化 + 反驳 + 知识堆砌检查
→ 书面词换口语词
→ 抽象描述换具体画面
→ 想象跟朋友喝啤酒聊天的语气
→ 有没有替读者说蠢话然后纠正？直接说你想说的
→ 有没有一段话塞了太多数据/术语？留最重要的那个
→ 有没有「有人跟我说」但说不出细节？去掉归属或换自己的经历
第7步：结尾 + 情绪曲线检查
→ 每条选题的结尾：是描述行为还是刺穿心理？
→ 能不能自然地带出核心信息？
→ 删掉最后一句，文章是否已经结束？如果已经结束，就删
→ 每段都收得漂漂亮亮？留一处没想通的地方，别修圆
第8步：三段式 + 开头检查
→ 有没有「A、B、C」的工整列举？能减就减
→ 开头是不是「钩子+痛点+承诺」三件套？直接从你想说的事开始
→ 能减就减，能换就换
第9步：对抗性审查（内容逻辑检查）
→ 论点前提：这个论点的前提是什么？能站得住脚吗？
→ 案例-结论匹配：这个案例能证明这个结论吗？有没有反例？
→ 思想家引用准确性：这个思想家的引用准确吗？有没有误读？
→ 「为什么」深度：这个「为什么」解释得够深吗？还是只解释了表面？
→ 逻辑漏洞：有没有逻辑漏洞？有没有边界条件？
→ 反例：有没有反例能推翻这个论点？
Nine, Complete Side-by-Side Example
AI-flavored original:
Data shows that contemporary young people face an unprecedented problem of social isolation. It's not that you don't want to socialize; it's that you don't know how to socialize. The spread of social media has not brought people closer; instead, it has deepened loneliness. In fact, this is a common phenomenon. In addition, it is worth noting that some social platforms try to provide users with a warm space for companionship.
Human-flavored rewrite:
You scrolled your phone all day—who did you talk to? The more social apps there are, the lonelier you get. That sentence sounds like a paradox, but it's a fact. On some social platform, there's a girl who posts a video every night, just one sentence: "Still awake? Thanks for your hard work today." Beneath it are hundreds of comments, all left at one or two in the morning. Change list:
- Deleted "data shows," "in fact," "in addition," "it is worth noting"
- Deleted "It's not that you don't want to socialize; it's that you don't know how to socialize" (banned sentence pattern)
- Deleted "unprecedented" and "common phenomenon" (abstract descriptions)
- Deleted "warm space for companionship" (promotional language)
- Added concrete images (the girl posting videos, the early-morning comments)
- Split the paragraph from 1 paragraph into 3 paragraphs