Our commitment to accuracy, independence, and transparency in every article.
This editorial policy sets out how content on Best Crypto Presales is researched, written, and corrected, and how we separate independent journalism from paid placements. Crypto is a market where misinformation spreads quickly and financial stakes are real, so this policy exists to give readers a clear picture of the standards our content is held to, not just a general statement of good intentions.
Editorial decisions, including which projects we cover, how we score them, and what a review says, are made by our editorial team without input from advertisers or projects seeking coverage. Purchasing advertising or sponsored content, described on our advertising page, does not influence review scores, news coverage, or rankings. Projects cannot pay to have negative findings removed, softened, or omitted from a review. When a conflict of interest exists, such as an affiliate relationship tied to a specific project, we disclose it rather than leaving readers to guess.
We prioritize primary sources over secondary reporting wherever possible. For a presale review, that typically means checking the project's own smart contract, tokenomics documentation, and audit report directly rather than relying solely on the project's marketing summary of them. For news coverage, we look for official statements, on-chain data, regulatory filings, or direct confirmation from the parties involved before treating a claim as established fact. When we cannot independently verify a claim, we say so explicitly rather than presenting it as confirmed.
Where a story depends on a single source, such as a project's own announcement, we attribute it clearly so readers understand the information has not yet been independently corroborated.
Before an article is published, it goes through a review step separate from the original writer. This step includes:
This process is designed to catch errors before publication, but no review process is infallible, which is why we also maintain a correction process for after publication.
When an error is identified after publication, we correct it and note that a correction was made, along with the date. Minor corrections, such as fixing a typo or an outdated link, are made without a formal note. Substantive corrections, such as a factual error about a project's tokenomics or a misattributed claim, are noted at the bottom of the article so readers can see what changed and when. We do not silently alter published claims about a project's risk profile or performance, since that kind of change without disclosure would undermine the record for anyone who read the original version.
If you believe something we published contains an error, you can contact us directly, and we will review the claim against our sources.
Sponsored content, press releases, and paid placements are clearly labeled as such and are kept editorially separate from our independent news, guides, and reviews. Sponsored content still goes through a basic accuracy check before publication, but it reflects the perspective of the paying project rather than our independent analysis, and it is not scored using our review methodology. Readers should treat sponsored content and independent reviews as two different kinds of information, and our labeling exists specifically to make that distinction easy to see at a glance.
Because this content can influence real financial decisions, we avoid language that implies guaranteed outcomes, such as promising specific returns or describing a presale as risk-free. We also avoid unverified superlatives, like calling a project ""the best"" or ""guaranteed to 10x"" without a clear, checkable basis for the claim. Where a project's own marketing uses this kind of language, we report it as the project's claim rather than adopting it as our own assessment.
Articles are published under the name of the author who researched and wrote them, and author bios are available on our authors page. We do this so readers can see who is responsible for a given piece of content and, where relevant, review that author's other work for consistency.
This editorial policy is reviewed periodically and updated when our processes change, such as when we adjust our review methodology or introduce new content formats. The version on this page reflects our current practice.
No. Review scores and editorial coverage are produced independently of advertising relationships, and that separation is a core part of this policy.
Contact us with the specific article and the claim in question, and our editorial team will review it against original sources and issue a correction if warranted.
No. Some content is sponsored or submitted as a press release, and this is always labeled clearly to distinguish it from our independent reporting and reviews.
We either omit the claim or attribute it clearly to its original source, such as a project's own announcement, so readers understand it has not yet been independently confirmed.
A minor correction fixes things like typos or outdated links without a formal note, while a substantive correction, such as a factual error about tokenomics, is disclosed at the bottom of the article along with the date it was made.
Yes. Where a conflict exists, such as an affiliate relationship tied to a specific project, it is disclosed rather than left for readers to discover on their own.
It is reviewed periodically and updated when our underlying processes change, such as adjustments to our review methodology or the introduction of new content formats.
"