How we decide what’s true enough to publish
This page explains how BasicsExplain researches, writes, labels and corrects its articles, including how we use AI tools and how advertising stays separate from editorial decisions.
Last updated: October 2026What this policy covers
BasicsExplain publishes explainer articles about everyday superstitions, beliefs and customs, for a general audience in the US, UK, Canada and Australia. Because we write about folklore, belief and sometimes health-adjacent topics (like interpreting body signs), we hold ourselves to a clear standard for sourcing, labeling and correcting our work. This page sets out that standard.
Sourced
Every factual claim traces back to a record, study or named source.
Labeled
We say plainly how solid a claim is, instead of presenting guesses as fact.
Correctable
Errors get fixed in place, with a visible update date. Nothing is quietly edited.
Not every belief has equally strong evidence, so we don’t write as if it does
A primary record or academic source confirms it
Stated as fact, with the source linked
Most folklorists or historians agree
“Most folklorists trace it to…”
Widely repeated, with little or no evidence
“A popular (but unproven) theory says…”
The evidence contradicts it
“There’s no evidence that…”
We couldn’t find a reliable source
Left out, or clearly marked as unverified
How an article gets written, and how we use AI
We’re upfront about this because readers deserve to know: we use AI tools to help with research and first drafts. On their own, those drafts are not good enough to publish, so none go live without the steps below.
1. Research against real sources
Folklore archives, historical newspapers, dictionaries and published psychology research, not just whatever already ranks on Google.
2. Draft, with AI assistance
A first draft may be written with AI help, using only the sources found in step one, not the model’s own unverified memory.
3. Human fact-check
A person checks every factual claim against its source, cuts anything that can’t be verified, and sets the evidence label for each claim.
4. Review and publish
A final read for tone, respect and accuracy before the article goes live under a named author.
Corrections
If you spot an error, tell us with a link to the article and, if you have one, a source. We check every report.
- Factual errors are corrected in the article text, not just acknowledged in a comment.
- Every corrected article shows a visible “last updated” date.
- Significant corrections, such as a reversed conclusion, are noted at the bottom of the article describing what changed.
- We do not quietly delete or rewrite claims to avoid acknowledging a mistake.
Editorial independence
BasicsExplain is supported by display advertising. Advertisers and ad networks have no input into which topics we cover, what an article concludes, or how a claim is labeled. We don’t accept payment in exchange for favorable coverage of a product, brand or belief system.
A respectful approach
Many of the customs we write about are tied to religion, culture or grief. We aim to explain their origins honestly, including when a popular origin story turns out to be untrue, without mocking the people who practice them. Articles that touch on death, mourning or religious ritual are reviewed with extra care for tone.
Not professional advice
BasicsExplain is for general information and curiosity. Nothing on this site is medical, psychological, legal or financial advice. Where an article touches on a body sign, health belief or money topic, we say so, and we’d rather leave a claim out than imply it’s medical or financial guidance.
Who’s responsible for this
Kamlesh Bhardwaj
Editorial policy on this site is set and enforced by Kamlesh Bhardwaj, the publisher of BasicsExplain. Questions about a specific article’s sourcing or a correction request can be sent through the contact page.
Spotted something that needs fixing?
Send us the article link and what looks wrong. We’ll check it against the sources and update the page.