Editorial standards

ChronoFive is entertainment with educational intent. These standards describe how events enter the game and how we handle sources, uncertainty, and corrections.

Event selection

We aim for events that are historically meaningful, widely attested, and interesting to a general audience. Lineups mix eras and themes so a single day is not dominated by one region or specialty. We avoid sensationalism for its own sake and prefer events where a year (or a well-established conventional year) can be stated clearly.

Source requirements

Event write-ups should rest on reputable secondary summaries and, where practical, primary or scholarly references. In the game UI, optional “sources” links are limited to HTTPS Wikipedia articles on en.wikipedia.org so players have a consistent, inspectable starting point. Wikipedia is a gateway, not the sole editorial authority behind the bank.

Date verification

Years are checked against multiple references when sources disagree. We prefer the consensus date used in mainstream reference works. For events that span ranges, we use the conventional year associated with the named event as presented in the clue (for example, a treaty signed in a given year, or a battle fought primarily in that year).

Disputed or uncertain dates

Ancient and medieval chronology can be uncertain. When scholars disagree, we choose a widely taught conventional year and phrase the clue so it matches that convention. If an event cannot be anchored to a defensible year without misleading players, it does not belong in the bank.

Corrections

If you spot a factual error in a year, title, or story, please contact us with the event name, the puzzle date if known, and a source. We review corrections and update the event bank when warranted. Already-played daily lineups stay stable for fairness; fixes apply going forward and to editorial text as appropriate.

Content updates

The event library grows and is revised over time. Daily lineups for a given calendar date are meant to remain fixed once published so shared scores stay comparable. Editorial improvements to wording or sources may ship without changing the underlying year or event identity.

AI assistance

Drafting tools, including AI assistants, may help organize research notes or polish prose. Final event selection, year decisions, and published copy are reviewed by humans against sources. AI output is not published unchecked as historical fact.

Independence

Chrono+ and advertising (when enabled) fund the project. They do not buy placement of specific historical claims. Sponsored content, if ever introduced, would be labeled clearly and kept separate from puzzle events.

Corrections and editorial questions: Contact.