Who publishes DafaMenu, how our guides are put together, and how to reach us when we get something wrong.
DafaMenu pages are reviewed for four practical signals: whether the page answers a real dining question, whether links route visitors to the right restaurant or guide, whether structured data avoids unsupported rating claims, and whether the sitemap reflects the real public page set. We also check production logs when possible so pages with actual crawler or visitor interest receive attention first.
Directory pages are different from opinion articles. The restaurant card has to preserve factual details such as name, address, phone, cuisine, and ordering URL. Editorial text around those cards should add context without inventing review scores. When we do not have enough evidence for a claim, we write a useful checklist instead of a ranking.
Corrections should be sent to info@dafamenu.com. The most useful correction includes the restaurant name, city, the page URL, and the specific field that changed. This keeps DafaMenu useful for diners and safer for restaurants whose menus, hours, and ordering links change over time.
Every DafaMenu content update should answer three questions before it is published. First, does the page help a diner choose a restaurant, cuisine, dish, ordering method, or timing strategy? Second, are the claims visible on the page supported by page evidence rather than invented ratings or generic trust numbers? Third, does the page link visitors toward a next useful step, such as a state page, cuisine page, restaurant menu, or related dining guide?
The team page exists to make that editorial accountability clear. A directory with many small pages can lose trust if it hides behind anonymous copy. DafaMenu should keep named editorial roles, correction instructions, and review standards visible so diners and restaurant owners understand how to report stale information.
DafaMenu should be maintained like a living restaurant directory. Menu URLs, phone numbers, and restaurant names can change without warning, and a page that was useful in spring can become stale by fall. The editorial team should prioritize corrections that affect a diner's next action: a broken menu link, a wrong city, a closed restaurant, a duplicate listing, or a page that claims more coverage than it actually has.
When a page is updated, the change should improve the reader's ability to order or decide. Cosmetic rewrites are less important than stronger internal links, clearer page titles, accurate sitemap coverage, and removal of unsupported rating claims. This policy gives future Claude or Codex work a clear rule: protect factual restaurant data first, then improve the surrounding explanation only where it helps a diner.
Future updates should not add invented awards, unsupported star ratings, copied vendor claims, or broad restaurant software language to this site. DafaMenu is strongest when it stays close to the diner: menu clarity, direct ordering, city discovery, cuisine choice, allergy handling, group meals, and event timing.
When search data is weak, editors should improve pages with real utility first: sitemap accuracy, restaurant records, direct menu links, and clear dining guidance.