Practical AI Radar Editorial Policy
Our pages are written to help readers make practical decisions. We separate source-backed facts from judgment, mark claims that can age, and avoid publishing recommendations that depend on unsupported numbers or vague authority.
The editorial desk is responsible for publication, source-refresh decisions, corrections, and commercial boundaries. The site does not claim medical, veterinary, electrical, security, or legal credentials; when a topic reaches those boundaries, the article should narrow the advice or refer readers to a qualified professional.
Source Standards
Every article lists the sources it actually relied on — official documentation, public repositories, product data sheets, government or standards pages — with the date each one was read.
Freshness Checks
Prices, versions, star counts, compatibility claims, subscriptions, and policy-sensitive details are treated as time-sensitive. They must be refreshed before important updates, product links, or paid promotion.
Commercial Boundaries
Ads and future affiliate links do not decide recommendations. If a page later receives a product link, the link must support the article's existing decision criteria and disclosure.
Corrections
Readers can use the contact page to flag outdated sources, unclear comparisons, or claims that need a narrower source. Corrections should improve the article rather than simply add more text.
AI Radar Specific Rules
AI Radar does not treat GitHub stars, trending rank, or social attention as product proof. Repository popularity is used as a research cue. A publishable review still needs workflow context, setup risk, maintenance signals, source links, and a clear reason a builder should test, wait, compare, or skip.