Fact-Checking Standards

This page lists the authoritative sources Crema relies on to
fact-check the claims in its articles. It applies to every article on this
site, in combination with the Editorial
Policy
.

Standards we hold sources to

A source counts as authoritative when it meets one or more of these criteria:

  • It is a standards body, professional association, or government agency
    with recognized authority in the subject.

  • It is peer-reviewed research published in a reputable venue.

  • It is a primary source — a rulebook, a piece of official documentation,
    a designer or maker’s own published statement, a regulatory filing.

  • It is an established, editorially-independent trade publication with a
    track record of accurate reporting in the field.

Individual bloggers, forum posts, and unverified social-media claims are not
treated as authoritative on their own. They may be cited when attributed
transparently (“a user on the r/coffee subreddit reports…”) but do
not carry the weight of the sources listed below.

Authoritative sources for home coffee brewing

  1. Specialty Coffee Association (SCA) — cupping protocol, brewing standards, the flavor wheel, water chemistry guidance.

  2. World Coffee Research — varietal reference, cultivar characteristics, agronomic research.

  3. James Hoffmann (World Barista Champion 2007) and Scott Rao (author of Everything but Espresso and The Coffee Roaster’s Companion) — authoritative practitioner sources on brewing technique and roasting.

  4. Peer-reviewed coffee chemistry and sensory research — when a claim about extraction, chemistry, or physiology warrants a citation.

What we do when sources disagree

If two authoritative sources disagree on a factual point, the article says
so explicitly, names both positions, and explains which one we’re following
and why. We do not launder disagreements into a single-voice answer that
pretends the disagreement doesn’t exist.

What we do when we cannot find a source

If we cannot find an authoritative source for a claim, we either drop the
claim, mark it clearly as speculation or personal observation, or replace it
with a weaker claim that we can source. Our editorial process treats
“we’re not sure” as an acceptable answer; “we sound sure but
made it up” is not.

Reporting a factual error

Found something we got wrong? Email
info.verse.real@gmail.com with the article URL, the
specific claim, and the source that shows the correct answer. Corrections are
handled per the Editorial Policy.