Shanghai Mahjongg - Classic Tile Matching Puzzle Game Experience the authent…
UniRise StudioSerious warnings 2 confirmed warnings. Checked: 400 reviews and the Android app’s code.
From our automated analysis, 27 Oct 2026. Every label links to its evidence in the full report below.
This analysis describes version 3.6.0 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 3.6.0, updated 2026-10-16.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
Shanghai Mahjongg - Classic Tile Matching Puzzle Game
Experience the authentic charm of traditional Mahjong Solitaire with modern convenience! Specially designed with seniors in mind, perfect for puzzle lovers of all ages seeking a relaxing yet challenging brain game.
Why Choose Shanghai Mahjongg:
•Classic Mahjong Solitaire - Timeless tile-matching gameplay with strategic depth
•Senior-Friendly Design - Large, clear tiles and easy-to-use controls (No squinting!)
•Brain Training Benefits - Improve memory, focus, and logical thinking
•Beautiful Traditional Design - Stunning visuals inspired by Chinese art and culture
•Stress-Free Experience - No time pressure, play at your comfortable pace
•Daily Mental Exercise - Fresh puzzles every day to keep your mind sharp
•Helpful Features - Smart hints, easy undos, and customizable themes
•Offline Play - Enjoy anywhere, no internet require…
From the developer’s store description.
For developers and the curious
The evidence, sources, measurements and versions behind every label above.
Findings that met the published evidence standard.
Bundles 16 distinct ad networks / mediation SDKs: Amazon Publisher Services, AppLovin MAX, BidMachine, Chartboost and 12 more
The package embeds several distinct advertising or mediation SDKs — a stack built for ad volume, not for a single house ad.
Package artefact
Appworthy
sha256:85d2d2095fec2101bf8dacc06f4c4a72a6f18ec70e333c4696812624893ea924Aggressive ad load: raised by 10 distinct reviewers (about 1 in 40 reviews we read)
Advertising volume or placement that interrupts normal use: ads between every action, unskippable or forced full-screen ads.
Specific evidence of a useful property, within the stated scope.
The developer's store data-safety disclosure states that data deletion can be requested; we have not seen a deletion control in the app's own text
The developer's data-safety disclosure on the store states that users can request deletion of their data, or the app's own text offers a way to delete the account. This restates what the developer declares; it is not a test of whether deletion works. Apple publishes no equivalent disclosure, so on an Apple-only listing only the app's own text can support it.
400 reviews read for this analysis. Each observation keeps the sample and store it was based on.
way too many ads.
full of ads one right after the other
Too many ads !
A sampled review illustrates one person’s experience. It does not establish a finding on its own.
“Not assessed” means we could not measure it. It is never a zero and never a pass.
Android package 3.6.0, scanned 27 Oct 2026. These describe that package, not the current store version.
Supporting measurements: not a complete list of possible harms or positives. Measurement vocabulary 1.4 · how these are measured
This analysis describes version 3.6.0 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 3.6.0, updated 2026-10-16.
Each store’s release notes, as the developer wrote them. They are the developer’s words, not ours.
No release notes were provided for this version.
shanghai-mahjonggAssessed 2026-10-27 from 400 user reviews and the app's package.
What the stores publish. Store ratings are the stores’ numbers, not Appworthy’s, and are never averaged across stores.
This assessment is produced automatically. Four independent signals are read — user reviews, SDKs in the app package, the app's own on-screen text and the app manifest — and each candidate finding is filed under the sources that support it.
No charge stands on one kind of evidence — with one published exception. A finding is either a measured fact that anyone can reproduce (an ad SDK is in the package; every subscription bills weekly; the privacy label omits a tracker we can see), or it is an interpretation — and an interpretation needs independent sources to agree before it reaches the catch list. The exception is a harm only users can see: a charge may publish from reviews alone, as “Reported by N users”, once enough reviewers raise it to clear that charge’s own published bar. That agreement rule is what replaced the human reviewer, not a model’s confidence.
There is no overall score, on purpose. A 0–99 number was published here until 2026-09-15. It was withdrawn because it discriminated too weakly to be the instrument — 44.7% of every pair of apps tied — and because a single number is a verdict where a count is an observation. What publishes instead is a row of measurements, each of which says what was counted and, where we could not look, says that instead.
Findings under One source only are real reports we do not stand behind as findings. They are shown because withholding them entirely would hide a genuine complaint, and labelled because publishing them as charges would be an accusation off a single source.
Write to [email protected], or use the form. Name the finding, the app version and the evidence that needs correcting. Factual corrections are free and never depend on buying anything.