ADVANTAGES OF OUR APP: * Castilian pronunciation by a native speaker * 2375 w…
LinDuoSome warnings 1 confirmed warning. 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 5.37.0 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 5.37.0, updated 2026-08-21.
Store screenshots supplied by the developer.
ADVANTAGES OF OUR APP:
* Castilian pronunciation by a native speaker
* 2375 words split into 180 topic lessons
* Does not require permanent Internet connection
* Beautiful illustrations for each word
* Phonetic transcription for each word
* Dark interface to study at night
* Choose from male and female voice
* Built in app dictionary with progress
* Game "True or False" to review pas material
* Special lessons with favorite, difficult, old, random words
* Flexible sound settings (music, speaker, effects)
* Just 10-15 minutes per day to learn all words
* For adults and teens 13+
Only 10-15 minutes per day Spending just 10-15 minutes every day, will easily allow you to remember all useful Spanish words. While memorizing words, the frequency of lesson is more important than duration of each lesson.…
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 5 distinct ad networks / mediation SDKs: AppLovin MAX, Fyber / Digital Turbine Exchange, Google Mobile Ads (AdMob / Ad Manager), ironSource / Unity LevelPlay and 1 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:fcea1b9fbd4b3cfbbaa3899849675b0680a9a9751bec8d7d6e672e8f5a6cdb3eSpecific 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.
Open observations that have not cleared the evidence bar.
The app's own text says: "Thanks for your interest. We will share more once you're back online."
This observation has not cleared the required evidence standard.
The app's own copy describes working without a connection — offline mode, downloading for offline use, or content saved for later. Shown because readers filter on it; it is a feature, not a fairness property, and never counts for or against an app.
Package artefact
sha256:fcea1b9fbd4b3cfbbaa3899849675b0680a9a9751bec8d7d6e672e8f5a6cdb3eNo review-based observation is published in this assessment. That does not establish that reviewers had no problems.
“Not assessed” means we could not measure it. It is never a zero and never a pass.
Android package 5.37.0, 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 5.37.0 of the app (the version number recorded inside the package we inspected), analyzed 2026-10-27 .
The store currently lists version 5.37.0, updated 2026-08-21.
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.
spanish-for-beginnersAssessed 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.