Skip to content
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
97 changes: 97 additions & 0 deletions docs/2025/reviews/tldr-pages-review.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,97 @@
# Technical documentation review

**Reviewed Documentation:** [tldr-pages](https://github.com/tldr-pages/tldr/tree/main) repository.

## Reviewer information:
- **Name**: Mariam Yusuff
- **Date of Review**: Spet. 26, 20256/09/2025
- **Review Level**: Intermediate

## 1. Summary:
*tldr-pages* is a community-maintained collection of short, example-based cheat-sheets for CLI commands. *tldr* focuses on practical examples which help with learning. It is a compact complement to *man* pages.

*Man* pages are the original documentations for UNIX and UNIX-like commands. However, these pages are often dense with lots of technical jargons.


The *tldr-pages* documentation explains:
- The purpose of the project.
- How contributors can add or improve pages.
- Style and formatting rules for writing code pages.
- Developer-specific guidelines such as linting and client-specification.



## 2. Clarity and comprehensiveness:

**Balance**
- The language is friendly and README.md provides useful links for beginners to check.
- CONTRIBUTING.md outlines the process of adding and editing pages.
- The style guide explains the page format with good examples.
- The documentation covers key areas including:
- The purpose of the project.
- Clear explanation of the pages and their purpose.
- How clients fetch pages.
- The contribution workflow: fork, clone, PR.
- The code pages are easy to scan through and understand.

**Gaps**
- Some sections assume prior Git and GitHub knowledge, which may not be true in all cases.
- CONTRIBUTING.md has numerous hyperlinks. This can cause users to jump around.
- CONTRIBUTING.md is too dense and contributors may not read the whole of it, which defeats its purpose.
- Some technical jargons such as “lint CI fails”, “autogenerated index” are not clearly explained.




## 3. Accuracy and relevance:
- Details such as the file structure and naming rules seem correct and align with the repository’s implementation.
- The repo follows best practices for open source contribution. For example, linking to GitHub help, PR templates.

**Caution**
- There should be periodic review to ensure installation examples are not outdated.
- The repo can align better with modern technical writing practices.


## 4. Structure and organization:
- There is clear separation of documents: README, CONTRIBUTING, Style guide, Client specification.

**Gaps**
- Fist time contributors may not know where to start as CONTRIBUTING.md is dense and has numerous links.
- There is no table of contents in CONTRIBUTING.md.
- Some sequential guides are scattered across multiple files.




## 5. Visual and design elements:
- There are no diagrams or screenshots.

- Consistent markdown formatting, but some sections are long walls of text.



## 6. Suggestions for improvement:
- A quickstart guide for beginners. Something like a "Make your first PR in 10 minutes" page. It can cover points such as:
- Forking, cloning, and creating a branch.
- Running `tldr-lint` locally to catch errors early.
- Checklist to go through before creating a PR.

- A table of contents in CONTRIBUTING.md.
- A "Start here" section to guide newcomers.
- Diagrams showing the folder structure.
- A troubleshooting section for common PR failures.
- The commands in the code pages should be indented. This allows for easier scanning and comprehension, especially for new users.



## 7. Notable strengths:
- The code pages are brief and straightforward. This helps with scanning.
- The friendly tone encourages contribution.
- The repo is well-structured which makes navigation once you understand the folder names.


## 8. Overall assessment:
Rating: 4/5
The documentation is strong, but could be better for onboarding absolute beginners.
It has a clear style guide and community-first tone. However, it lacks a single “follow-this-exactly” quickstart guide.