Editorial Standards

How DreamNoos maintains quality, accuracy, and transparency across all dream interpretations.

Our commitment to quality

DreamNoos exists to provide the most reliable, well-sourced dream interpretation resource on the internet. This page explains the standards we hold ourselves to.

Content quality system

Every page on DreamNoos carries two machine-readable quality signals:

Quality score (0-100)

Each page receives a quality score based on:

  • Source depth — Are classical and modern sources cited?
  • Cultural breadth — Are multiple perspectives represented?
  • Structural completeness — Does the page cover definition, interpretation, context, and variations?
  • Word count — Does the page meet the minimum depth threshold for its type?
  • Editorial review status — Has the page been reviewed by an editor?

Tier classification

Tier Meaning Indexing
Tier 1 Publication-ready, fully reviewed Indexed, appears in sitemap
Tier 2 Draft quality, needs editorial review Indexed with caution
Tier 3 Stub or incomplete Not indexed (noindex)

Pages below our quality threshold are automatically excluded from search engine indexing. They remain on the site for internal development but are not presented to readers via search.

What we require in every dream interpretation

A complete DreamNoos dream interpretation must include:

  1. Definition and overview — What the dream scenario or symbol is
  2. Classical interpretation — What historical traditions say
  3. Psychological perspective — What modern dream science suggests
  4. Cultural context — How meaning varies across traditions
  5. Contextual variations — How setting, emotion, and narrative modify the reading
  6. FAQ section — Addressing the most common reader questions

Pages that lack these sections receive a lower quality score and may be excluded from indexing.

What we will not publish

  • Interpretations presented as absolute fact without qualification
  • Claims that dreams predict specific future events
  • Content that substitutes for professional mental health advice
  • Unreviewed machine-generated text
  • Single-tradition interpretations presented as universal truth

Review process

  1. Initial draft — Written by an editorial team member or generated from our pipeline with editorial oversight
  2. Source verification — All classical and academic citations checked against original texts
  3. Cross-cultural review — Ensure no single cultural lens dominates
  4. Quality scoring — Automated assessment of structural completeness
  5. Editorial sign-off — Final human review before Tier 1 publication

Corrections and updates

We welcome corrections. If you find an error, an unsourced claim, or a cultural misrepresentation, please contact us through our contact page. All corrections are reviewed within 7 days and credited where appropriate.

Content is reviewed on a rolling basis. The last_reviewed date on each page indicates when it was last verified by an editor.