Editorial method · Community trust

Know whose voice you are reading.

ChinaTrip DIY separates our editorial judgment, our summaries of external discussions, and native traveler submissions. They never become one blended rating.

Standards reviewed 2026-09-04. Material changes are recorded on this page.Question contact, privacy and retention information updated 2026-09-08.
01 / Our voice

Editorial recommendation stars

A sight's score is ChinaTrip DIY's editorial judgment for travelers choosing among the sights in our current destination catalog. It is not a traveler average, popularity vote, copied platform score, or promise that everyone will enjoy it.

4.5–5 stars

A standout choice with strong destination-defining value.

4 stars

A strong choice whose value depends more on interests or practical friction.

3–3.5 stars

A selective choice: worthwhile for a narrower interest, context or tradeoff.

Editors weigh distinctiveness, the quality of the experience, relevance to the city, and the effort or access friction relative to the payoff. Scores use half-star steps and may change when the evidence or experience changes. We do not emit Review or AggregateRating structured data for these scores.

02 / Other platforms

External traveler perspectives

Editors manually select relevant public discussions and write concise original summaries or rights-compatible paraphrases. We do not republish a scraped post body, avatar, vote count or external rating. One source is labeled as one perspective; source volume is not treated as proof of consensus.

Each note keeps a direct original-post link, platform, source type, retrieval date, rights basis and relevant sight tags. Licensed adaptations also show the revision, contributor credit, changes notice and licence. If a source disappears or materially changes, we review the note and may amend or remove it.

03 / Our community desk

Native city reviews and questions

Share one useful experience about arrival, transport, payment, accommodation or a sight; you do not need to evaluate the whole city. Choose one main city so readers can find it. Reviews belong to that city; optional sight tags only help discovery. A supplied visit month is reported by the contributor, not independently verified. Questions can cover city or sight decisions and practical preparation such as arrival, transport, payment or accommodation. The person asking must choose one main city so readers can find the question. We do not provide itineraries or individual legal or visa determinations. Both forms are free, manually reviewed and selective; we cannot promise an individual answer or response time. Both enter a private queue and appear publicly only after human moderation. We may correct spelling, remove personal details or tighten wording without changing the contributor's meaning.

Each approved review or answered question receives a stable page within its city guide and may be indexed by search engines. City pages link to those records, and review sight tags link to the relevant sight guide when one exists. A tagged review may also appear on that sight page, with a link to its original city-owned record. Pending and closed records never receive a public content page.

An editor may update an existing guide or FAQ, publish a separate editorial answer, or close a question with a private status-page link to an existing guide or published answer. In that last case, the source question stays private and no public question page is created. A traveler's question, an editorial example used to explain the form, and an editor's answer are different kinds of text and are labeled as such.

We reject spam, abuse, promotional copy, copied reviews, unsupported high-stakes claims and personal, passport, payment or booking details. The forms require no name, account or public profile. When the optional email field is available on the question form, it has separate contact consent and is visible only to authorized editors. The site does not automatically send verification, answer or status email to that address. An editor may instead reply manually from their own mailbox. The email is never added to the public question or profile. This does not mean we can prove anonymity, identity, ownership or that a claimed visit happened. Published traveler content remains visibly distinct from editorial answers and external-source summaries.

When email notifications are configured, a site-owner notification contains only the chosen city and a link to the protected question desk; it omits the question, email address and private reference. From that desk an editor may open an external email client or copy the optional address. After sending manually, the editor can record that action and close the question without publishing it. The site does not store the email message body or treat an opened email client as proof of sending or delivery. Any conversation is handled manually in the mailbox rather than added to the site. Email and response times are not guaranteed.

Automated checks reject some recognizable contact details and links before receipt. They cannot detect every privacy or factual risk. Human moderation must also check names, booking details, copied or promotional material and unsupported claims; receiving a submission does not mean it is published or verified.

04 / Challenge the record

Reports, corrections and removal

Every native review, answered question and external summary has a link to a private moderation request. Use it to identify inaccurate, unsafe, private, outdated or rights-sensitive content. We may correct, annotate, unpublish or delete the target after editorial review; submitting a request does not guarantee a particular outcome or response time.

Request text is never republished as a review or question. Because the request form has no account or contact field, we do not claim to verify requester identity or ownership from the form alone. Editors assess the content, privacy risk, source record and exact reference. When an editor applies a native-content removal, closing that record removes it from our city and tagged sight pages, its stable detail URL and the public sitemap on the next request; an external summary requires an editorial content change. The private audit row then follows the retention rule below.

We do not ask browsers or CDNs to store these live community pages. Search engines and other services may retain earlier copies until they revisit or process a removal; we cannot promise immediate deletion from systems we do not control.

Open the private moderation form
05 / Data handling

Retention and deletion limits

  • Pending, unpublished submissions and moderation requests: deleted after 180 days if still pending.
  • Closed private records: deleted after 90 days from closure.
  • Published reviews and answered questions: retained while published so the public page and editorial record remain stable. If withdrawn, they become closed and enter the 90-day deletion window.
  • Optional question email: retained for at most 180 days, shortened to 30 days after an editor records a manual email reply. Expired addresses cannot be used for new messages and are deleted by the next daily purge.

A scheduled daily purge enforces these limits. The private database stores the city, submitted text, consent, status and timestamps; review submissions may also store a visit month and sight tags. Moderation requests additionally store their target and requested action. Short-lived, one-way keyed counters derived from the request address may be stored separately to control abuse; the raw network address is not inserted into the community submission or contact records.

An optional contact address and its private removal token are encrypted in a separate database table. The contact-removal button removes the address; it does not delete the question or change any public record. The site does not automatically send mail to that user address. Once an editor sends a message manually, the external mail provider, recipient mailbox and their backups may keep copies under their own rules, and removing the site contact cannot recall them.

Private revision records keep the before-and-after moderated wording, decision time, editor code and reason for changes to native reviews and answers. They are not public profiles or public version archives. They follow the same retention window as the contribution and are deleted with it. Resolution links from closed questions are part of that private audit trail and follow the same cascade deletion. A closed question cannot be reopened. Public pages distinguish the first publication date from later content updates.

An immutable manual-handling record follows its closed parent question into the 90-day deletion window. It records the editor, time and moderation reason, without copying the external email body. Owner-alert metadata is removed after 30 days when accepted or cancelled and after 90 days when failed; anonymous submission retry keys are removed after 7 days. An owner-alert record says nothing about delivery to a traveler.

Editors can permanently delete an exact target earlier through a guarded moderation command that requires the reference to be entered twice. Database backups and Cloudflare platform logs may follow their own infrastructure retention, so we do not promise instant erasure from every backup or operational log.

Use the private contact-removal link shown after submission to remove the optional address. To ask us to review, correct or remove the retained question or a public answer, use the private correction and removal form with the saved reference when available.

06 / Independence

Commercial independence

Paid businesses cannot buy a higher editorial score, a favorable summary, publication of a native review, or suppression of a legitimate criticism. Lodging commerce is inactive while this editorial and community experience is being established.

Material changes

— Published the dedicated moderation-request workflow, explicit retention windows and automatic private-record purge.

— Added private native-content revision history, preserving first publication dates and deleting history with its contribution. Earlier editing history cannot be reconstructed.

— Clarified practical question scope, editorial resolution choices and the private link to existing published reading. The 180-day pending and 90-day closed retention limits remain unchanged.

— Documented optional contact email, manual replies, owner-notice minimization, contact removal and record-retention boundaries.