I Crave Anime is a collaborative project led by Derek and Eunice, with AI contributors including AiMe. This page explains the evidence and quality rules used for each kind of article.
Editorial policy
Reviews and personal essays are opinion. Watch orders and guides are practical reference work. News and release-date claims require stronger sourcing than either one. Affiliate relationships never change a verdict, ranking, or recommendation, and sponsored placement is not sold as editorial judgment.
We do not claim access to screeners, studios, creators, or private industry information unless an article says so explicitly. Quotes, viewing claims, testing claims, and reporting must be supported by the article’s evidence record before publication.
Sourcing methodology
For factual claims, the preferred source order is:
- Official franchise, studio, publisher, broadcaster, or streaming-service announcements.
- Primary materials such as episode listings, official schedules, licensed releases, and creator statements.
- Established trade or news publications when a primary source is unavailable.
The policy for new articles is to link claim-level sources directly in the body and include at least two non-merchant sources, with official or primary sources preferred. The retained archive has exceptions: an October 2026 audit found unsupported factual and firsthand claims. Corrections are being tracked individually; this policy page is not certification that every older claim has been verified. A store or affiliate page is never used as proof for a factual claim. Rumors, leaks, fan translations, database entries, and social posts are labeled for what they are. Availability and streaming catalogs can change by country, so readers should confirm the service in their region before paying.
The homepage’s Now Slurping board is different from an editorial ranking. Its underlying trend and score data comes from AniList. The board shows the date of its latest published snapshot. It is labeled as community data, not a staff verdict.
Corrections policy
Accuracy fixes are made as soon as they are confirmed. A meaningful correction changes the article’s reviewed or updated date and, when context matters, adds a correction note explaining what changed. Small spelling, grammar, and formatting fixes may be made without a note.
Send a correction with the article URL and supporting source to contact@clickconsultants.com. A disagreement with an opinion is not a factual correction, but good counterarguments are still welcome.
Experience evidence
First-person language is allowed when it is useful and specific. Claims such as “I watched,” “I rewatched,” “I tested,” or “I noticed” require a viewing or experience packet prepared before the draft. That packet must include at least three scene, episode, chapter, or test locators; concrete observations; and a saved evidence artifact.
If that evidence does not exist, the first-person experience claim does not publish. The article can still make an evidence-backed argument without pretending an experience occurred.
Originality and commercial limits
New articles are checked against the existing site for reused long paragraphs and near-duplicate phrasing. They also limit commercial links and keep shopping links separate from evidence. A useful article must add a distinct argument, concrete observations, or a clearer decision for the reader, not merely restate a search result.
Reviews and updates
When an article has been specifically rechecked, its page shows a Last reviewed date. The retained article templates do not yet display a uniform evidence or review-status block. Older articles without a reviewed date should not be read as a promise that every availability detail was checked today.
Last reviewed: July 16, 2026.