Source-first research

AniChronicle gathers evidence through a local research pipeline that prefers structured provider metadata and may include bounded web sources when configured. Evidence ranking and claim ceilings limit how strongly statements may be phrased.

Evidence and uncertain claims

Where evidence is limited, incomplete, or conflicting, articles should reflect that uncertainty rather than escalate claims. Source evidence and editorial interpretation are not the same thing; interpretation must remain proportionate to available support.

AI assistance and human review

AI tools assist with research extraction and draft writing. Automated quality and semantic checks run after generation. A human editor must review and approve content before a WordPress draft is created. Publication remains a manual WordPress action.

Accuracy limits

We do not claim that every fact is guaranteed accurate, that all information is manually verified line-by-line, or that AI never makes mistakes. Evidence controls reduce overclaim risk; they do not eliminate error.

Corrections

Material corrections should update the article content. The WordPress modified date should reflect meaningful editorial updates. Metadata-only regenerations should not be treated as content revisions.

Sources

Where sources are associated with a published article, AniChronicle may surface reader-facing source names and links. Internal diagnostics, prompts, credentials, and database identifiers are not shown to readers.