Strange AnimalsEditorial standards · Last reviewed May 2026Standards that don't move.
Every piece uses the same objective standard throughout: primary scientific sources, verified taxonomy, current IUCN status and human editorial judgment at each step.
Peer-reviewedprimary sources only
Humanwritten and edited
IUCNstatus in every species article
Five editorial principles
Scientific sourcesPeer-reviewed journals and named field biologists as primary references.
Human authorshipWritten and edited by people with wildlife and biology expertise.
Conservation ethicsAnimals treated as subjects, not clickbait. IUCN status always included.
Verified factsTaxonomy, behaviour and biology cross-checked against authoritative sources.
IndependentAdvertiser relationships never influence topics or conclusions.
From paper to page
The process divides into five stages, each drawing from its own sources. Never aggregated from other websites.
1
RESEARCH Primary scientific research Peer-reviewed papers in zoology, ecology, ethology and conservation biology. ZooKeysZootaxaJournal of ZoologyAnimal Behaviour
2
CROSS-CHECK Institutional sources Status straight from the Red List. Range checked against wildlife agencies and WWF maps. IUCN Red ListWWF Species Profiles
3
DRAFT Expert writers Biologists and science journalists draft. Every claim names its scientist or institution. Conservation BiologyBiological Conservation
4
VERIFY Taxonomy check Names and classifications verified, with monographs where taxonomy is contested. Catalogue of LifeITIS
5
PUBLISH Live, then maintained Published with a date. Red List changes, new taxonomy and reader corrections trigger revisions. Dated revisionsCorrection log
EVERY ARTICLE SHIPS WITH Publication dateand last revisionIUCN statusfor every speciesNamed sourcesscientists or institutionsCorrection notesdated, never hidden
HOW SURE ARE WE?
See them in use →Four confidence grades
Every figure in our record book and status register carries one of these grades, so readers know what kind of evidence sits behind it.
MEASUREDTaken directly from a specimen, a timed run, a tagged animal or a controlled study.Example: Lolong the saltwater crocodile, 6.17 m
ESTIMATEDDerived from models, dating methods, partial fossils or population statistics.Example: Greenland shark, ~400 years from eye-lens dating
REPORTEDWidely cited, but resting on a single or historical account.Example: Rüppell's vulture at 11,300 m
DISPUTEDPublished, but challenged by later measurements.Example: Sailfish at 110 km/h
CORRECTIONS · IN PARTNERSHIP WITH CITEPEP
Contribute on CitePep →We'd rather be corrected than be wrong
1Spot itFind a claim that looks out of date or wrong on any page.
2File on CitePepPoint at the claim and attach the source that contradicts it.
3We reviewAn editor checks the correction against primary sources.
4PublishedAccepted corrections appear on the page with your name and a permanent link.
Pages built to be cited
Every entry includes a review date, confidence grades and a ready-made citation.
Our policies
CONSERVATION ETHICSHow we cover wildlife
We cover animals because they're scientifically extraordinary, not because danger generates clicks.
Current IUCN status appears in every species article. We link to legitimate conservation groups, never commercial outlets.
We never promote exotic pet ownership of species that suffer in captivity, or wildlife trafficking.
Where science is unsettled, we report the debate and link the literature instead of faking certainty.
SPOTTED AN ERROR?Send us the article link, the claim, and your source.Every correction request is checked against primary sources and gets a reply.