Facts, dates, and traditions need different labels

We prefer accountable institutions and specialist references for checkable facts: calendar and observatory material for date boundaries, gemological institutions for stone composition and care, and botanical or horticultural references for plant names and characteristics.

A source can document that a tradition exists without proving the tradition scientifically. For symbolic associations, our goal is to identify the tradition and avoid turning it into a universal statement.

When reputable sources disagree, pages should describe the variation, cite the relevant convention, and avoid selecting one answer merely because it sounds more definitive.

The My Birth Symbols editorial team is the accountable editorial owner. Its review workflow checks content records for required sources, contradictory statements, unsupported superlatives, date-boundary behavior, and language that could be mistaken for a health or scientific claim.

A visible reviewed date should represent an actual editorial review, not a build or deployment date. When no reliable publication or modification date exists, the site should omit it rather than manufacture freshness.

Structured data must match visible content and working product behavior. A calculator is not marked up as site search, and authorship is not attributed to an identity the site cannot substantiate.

Astrological personality descriptions, flower meanings, gemstone symbolism, and crystal practices are presented as interpretive, cultural, or spiritual traditions. They are not medical advice, treatments, diagnoses, or scientific conclusions.

Practical stone-care or plant information should come from an appropriate reference and remain separate from spiritual interpretations.