Editorial Policy

This page describes how Somnovis content is produced, what rules it must follow, and where the process has limits. It is written to be checked against the site rather than to reassure.

1. AI assistance is disclosed, not hidden

Articles on this site are written with AI assistance against a documented specification: a house style per language, a required structure, and a set of hard rules described below. Every article is then checked by automated gates before it can go live. There is no pretence of a human newsroom, and no fabricated author bylines — you will not find invented staff writers here.

2. Rules the writing must follow

No false attribution.A specific claim is never attributed to a named historical figure — Ibn Sirin, Freud, Jung, Miller — unless the claim genuinely belongs to that source. Describing a school of thought in general terms is allowed; putting words in a real person's mouth is not. A mechanical check fails the build if a new or edited sentence names one of those figures without having been reviewed into the attribution baseline.

No invented evidence. In the science section, a citation, DOI, study, sample size, publication year or researcher name may never be invented. Articles may only state facts from a fixed authoring brief, must hedge exactly where the research field hedges, and are checked by a verification script that flags anything shaped like a fabricated citation.

No medical or psychological advice. Nothing here diagnoses, treats or predicts. Health-adjacent science articles are required to point the reader to a doctor, and a disclaimer renders under every one of them.

Traditions are described, not endorsed. Interpretations from religious and folk traditions are presented as what that tradition holds, not as what is true. Chinese folk material must separate dream-manual style readings from everyday idioms; we do not invent proverbs.

3. The publish gate and the depth target

An article is not visible on this site merely because it was written. It moves through draft → generated → reviewed → published, and only reaches the last state after passing automated checks on length and on not duplicating a sibling page. Anything that fails stays in the database and off the site until it is improved.

The minimum publish floor is about 1,100 characters of body plus tradition sections (500 for Chinese), measured in characters because word counts do not work across our scripts. That floor exists so thin near-duplicates cannot ship unnoticed. Separately, the depth target for a finished dictionary article is about 3,500 characters (1,400 for Chinese) — roughly a short essay with three distinct tradition sections. Science articles already sit at that standard. Dictionary articles are being raised to it in waves; the homepage and category hubs surface deepened articles first.

We are being specific about this because it is the thing most likely to go wrong on a site of this size. Publishing a large number of thin, near-identical pages is both bad for readers and the fastest way to make a reference site worthless. The gate exists to make that failure loud instead of silent; the depth work exists so the live catalog actually earns the reader's time.

4. Known limits

A majority of dictionary articles are still shorter than the depth target above. That is a known gap being worked through in priority order (search demand and editorial substance), not the intended end state. If you open a symbol page that feels thinner than a science article or than one of the featured dictionary pages on the homepage, you have found that gap.

Personal AI dream readings, the paid feature, are generated on request and delivered directly to the customer without human review. That is disclosed at the point of purchase, and those pages are not part of the public reference content.

5. Corrections

Write to support@somnovis.com naming the page and the problem. Factual errors in the science section are treated as the highest priority, because that is the only part of the site asserting things about the world.