Editorial Policy

Our editorial mission

AIpedia exists to help readers make confident, informed decisions about AI tools. We are an independent publisher — not owned, operated, or influenced by any of the vendors we review. Our mission is to explain what each AI product actually does in practice, where it fits in a real workflow, and where it falls short, so that a first-time visitor can reach a decision within minutes rather than days.

Who writes AIpedia

Reviews and comparisons are produced by the AIpedia Editorial Team under the supervision of our founder and editor, Makino, a SaaS developer with first-hand experience building and operating AI-powered marketing products including MixCast, AIOPulse, and UGCast. Every review is reviewed by at least one editor before publication.

How we research tools

1. We sign up for the tool directly and, where feasible, use its free tier or trial to perform representative tasks.
2. We cross-reference the vendor's own documentation for pricing, features, limits, and supported platforms.
3. We compare the tool against 2–6 closely competitive products in the same category to understand where its trade-offs sit.
4. We evaluate independent third-party sources — official changelogs, release notes, developer documentation, and public case studies — to validate what we observe.
5. We summarise findings into an editorial verdict that any prospective user can act on.

Sourcing & factual accuracy

Every factual claim on AIpedia — a price, a feature, a limit, a company name — should be verifiable against either the vendor's own website or other primary source at the time of review. When figures are taken from a secondary source we cite it explicitly. We do not fabricate or estimate metrics, and we do not copy text verbatim from vendor marketing.

Use of AI in our workflow

We use AI tools — including large language models — in our editorial workflow for research synthesis, first drafts, translation support, and consistency checks. Every piece of content is then reviewed, edited, and fact-checked by a human editor before publication. We do not auto-publish AI output without review. This is consistent with Google Search's guidance on AI-generated content, which emphasises that helpfulness and quality — not the production method — are what matter to readers and to ranking.

Editorial independence

AIpedia is funded by a mix of affiliate commissions and display advertising. Affiliate relationships exist with a subset of the tools we review. They never influence our editorial opinion, our rating scale, or which products we choose to cover. A tool without an affiliate programme is covered at the same depth as one with a lucrative referral rate. Editorial decisions are made separately from commercial ones, and advertisers never get pre-publication preview rights over reviews. See our affiliate disclosure for the full relationship.

How we rate tools

Our 1.0–5.0 editorial rating consolidates four weighted factors: Value for money (pricing relative to feature depth), Feature completeness (how many of the jobs users expect the tool to do are supported), Usability (how approachable the tool is to a new user), and Reliability (quality consistency, uptime, documentation). Full rubric is available on our review methodology page.

Update cadence

We re-check every featured tool at least twice per year, and immediately after a major release, pricing change, or ownership change. If a tool is discontinued or materially changes scope, we update the review, mark the change at the top of the article, and, where appropriate, deprecate the page from our index. The Last updated date on every review reflects the most recent editorial pass.

Corrections & complaints

If you believe any statement on AIpedia is inaccurate, please contact us via the contact page or email [email protected]. We aim to acknowledge corrections within two business days and correct verified errors promptly. Material corrections are annotated at the foot of the affected article.

What we won't do

• We do not accept payment in exchange for favourable reviews, higher ratings, or guaranteed coverage.
• We do not publish AI output without human review.
• We do not republish vendor marketing copy as our own editorial content.
• We do not delete negative reviews at a vendor's request — we correct factual errors only.

Questions about this policy

Suggestions or corrections to the policy itself are welcome. Write to us through the contact page.