Publication and maintenance rules

Content Review Policy

Publication is controlled by record-level gates, not by whether a route can technically be generated. This policy explains the statuses, minimum evidence, update triggers, and removal rules.

Last reviewed: July 26, 2026

Review statuses

Review status is necessary but not sufficient. A reviewed record remains unpublished when any separate publication gate fails.

StatusEligible for publicationMeaning
DraftNoAn incomplete editorial record that is still being researched.
ImportedNoA record brought in from an earlier dataset without sufficient field-level review.
Needs reviewNoA known candidate with unresolved evidence, interpretation, or relationship issues.
ReviewedYes, if all gates passThe required fields and cited evidence have been checked for the current publication scope.
VerifiedYes, if all gates passA stronger internal state reserved for records with additional confirmation. It is not a guarantee about every bearer or legal use.

Minimum publication gates

Given-name page

  • Reviewed or verified internal status
  • Non-empty pronunciation, origin, and naturalness note
  • At least one sourced kanji–reading variant
  • Variant meanings, usage note, and source IDs
  • Field-level citations and a real review date
  • At least one relationship to another publishable name

Surname page

  • Exact dictionary-supported spelling and reading
  • Literal glosses kept separate from etymology
  • A cited ranking record for the current release scope
  • Survey precision retained exactly as published
  • Field-level citations and a real review date
  • At least one related publishable surname

Meaning collection

  • Explicit index status and reviewed status
  • Between 5 and 20 publishable name records
  • Exact matching spellings and qualifying kanji
  • Dictionary evidence for the spelling and gloss
  • Visible evidence boundary and inclusion rule
  • At least one evidence-linked related collection

Update triggers and review dates

Reviews are event-driven. The site does not imply a recurring schedule that has not occurred, and it does not change a last-reviewed date merely because a page was rebuilt or deployed.

  • A cited source changes, moves, or publishes a materially different methodology.
  • A reader supplies evidence that directly challenges a spelling, reading, ranking, gloss, or contextual statement.
  • A related record changes in a way that affects internal links or a meaning collection.
  • A technical audit finds broken structured data, metadata, sitemap membership, or an invalid local target.
  • The editorial scope expands and requires stronger evidence than the current record provides.

Corrections, conflicts, and unpublishing

When evidence conflicts

The narrower claim is preferred. Conflicting sources are not averaged into certainty. The page may add a limitation, reduce confidence, move to needs-review, or stop publishing until the discrepancy is resolved.

When a page is removed

A page that no longer passes its gate must leave generated routes, internal reviewed links, and sitemaps. A broken source alone does not authorize replacing it with an unsupported claim.

Use the correction form to identify the exact page and claim. There is no guaranteed response time; publication changes depend on evidence review and successful quality checks.

Editorial transparency

These pages describe what the site checks, what its sources can support, and how readers can challenge a published claim.

Editorial Methodology

How JapanNames separates sourced facts, editorial interpretation, and randomized suggestions.

Sources & Evidence

The source catalog, evidence scope, limitations, and access dates used by published records.

Content Review Policy Current page

Publication gates, review statuses, update triggers, and unpublishing rules.

Review policy version checked 2026-07-26.