Editorial standards

1. Source hierarchy

For procedures, public systems, immigration, tax, health, safety, housing rules, and official documents, we prioritize official sources: national ministries, immigration services, municipalities, public agencies, and primary institutional pages. Secondary explainers can help readability, but they do not override official sources.

2. Date every practical claim

Japan-specific procedures change. Pages that explain processes, forms, phone numbers, office routes, eligibility, or fees should carry a review date or visible update marker. If a page looks outdated, users should treat it as a starting point and verify with the responsible official source.

3. Separate facts, judgment, and action

• Facts: what the source says, what a form asks for, what a process normally requires.
• Judgment: what may be risky, uncertain, or dependent on personal circumstances.
• Action: what the user can prepare, ask, print, translate, or verify next.

4. AI output is not final authority

AI may translate, summarize, structure, and suggest next steps. It must not be treated as a final conclusion for legal disputes, immigration status, tax filing, medical care, investment decisions, loan screening, or real-estate contract risk.

See also AI boundary.

5. No guaranteed outcomes

We avoid claims that imply certainty where the decision belongs to a landlord, guarantor company, bank, immigration office, city office, hospital, school, court, or other authority. We do not promise approval, success, refund, visa outcome, loan outcome, rental approval, or investment return.

6. Corrections and feedback

Users can report outdated facts, broken official links, unclear instructions, or missing scenarios. Corrections should favor the source hierarchy above and update the page review date when the change affects user action.