Structured, chef tested recipes supported by practical cooking education.
Structured, chef tested recipes supported by practical cooking education.
Structured, chef tested recipes supported by practical cooking education.
RecipeWanted Quality & Safety Standard
This standard explains how RecipeWanted approaches editorial quality, practical cooking accuracy, responsible claims, AI-assisted workflows, corrections and the boundaries around food and cooking guidance.
It applies across RecipeWanted recipes, Cooking Education, editorial content and other published cooking resources, while allowing the level of review to reflect the subject and the potential consequence of getting it wrong.
Found something that may need reviewing? Contact RecipeWanted.
Scope of this standard: RecipeWanted provides general cooking, recipe and food-education information. It does not represent personalised medical or dietetic advice, allergy diagnosis, legal advice, formal catering compliance certification, or approval by a government or regulatory body.
Why This Standard Exists
RecipeWanted publishes across different types of cooking content, from recipes and practical education to editorial articles. A shared standard creates a consistent basis for deciding what good information looks like, where extra care is needed and how published material should be reviewed over time.
Recipes, Education guides and editorial content may serve different purposes, but clarity, practical usefulness, responsible wording and editorial accountability should remain consistent across RecipeWanted.
A minor wording issue does not carry the same consequence as incorrect information involving allergens, storage, reheating or another safety-sensitive subject. The standard allows review depth to reflect that difference.
Publishing the standard makes RecipeWanted's approach easier to assess without requiring users, educators, organisations or partners to infer how content, claims and corrections are handled behind the scenes.
Cooking information, references, links and platform practices can change. A visible standard creates a basis for correcting, clarifying and improving content when better information or a material issue is identified.
How We Handle Cooking Information
RecipeWanted aims to explain what a cook needs to know without pretending that every kitchen, ingredient, appliance or personal circumstance will produce an identical result. Guidance should be useful enough to act on and careful enough to show where conditions can change the answer.
A recipe should not require an ingredient that is missing from the list, introduce an unexplained step, contradict its own timing, or describe a result that does not make practical sense for the method being used.
Useful guidance can explain why browning develops flavour, why dough rests, why a sauce needs gentler heat or why weighing matters in some baking. The explanation should help a cook make a better decision rather than add technical detail for its own sake.
Replacing an ingredient can affect flavour, moisture, structure, rise, browning, cooking time or storage behaviour. Where a swap is suggested, RecipeWanted should explain meaningful trade-offs rather than imply that every substitute is an identical replacement.
Storage, reheating, allergens, hygiene and other safety-sensitive subjects require more careful wording than ordinary technique advice. Guidance should identify important limitations and direct users toward appropriate labels or current local guidance when needed.
RecipeWanted may discuss ingredients, dietary characteristics and general food context, but should not present recipes as diagnosis, treatment, disease prevention or personalised nutrition advice, or guarantee suitability for a particular allergy.
Editorial Boundary
These examples show the difference between useful cooking education and a level of certainty the platform should not imply.
| Area | RecipeWanted Can Explain | RecipeWanted Should Not Claim |
|---|---|---|
| Cooking methods | How heat, timing and technique commonly affect texture, flavour, browning and doneness. | That one instruction will produce an identical result across every appliance, ingredient and kitchen. |
| Substitutions | Why a replacement may work, what may change and when the result needs additional adjustment. | That a substitute is automatically equivalent, allergen-safe or suitable for every dietary requirement. |
| Storage & reheating | General handling principles, practical risk awareness and important points that warrant extra care. | That RecipeWanted replaces current local food-safety rules, professional procedures or required training. |
| Nutrition & allergens | General ingredient context, dietary characteristics and reminders to check labels and individual requirements. | Diagnosis, treatment, medical suitability or guaranteed allergen safety for an individual user. |
| Education & professional use | Practical explanations that may support cooking education, training discussion and general learning. | Formal approval for a curriculum, school, healthcare setting, professional kitchen, regulator or other controlled environment. |
Source & Reference Policy
Not every ordinary cooking instruction requires an external citation. External verification becomes more important when information is safety-sensitive, product-specific, time-sensitive, commercially material or capable of changing a meaningful user decision.
A source should be relevant to the specific ingredient, product, safety question, cooking principle or factual claim. A reputable source on a broad subject does not automatically support every narrower conclusion drawn from it.
Where food safety, allergens, regulation or another consequential subject is involved, current official or otherwise authoritative information should carry more weight than general articles, promotional material or informal advice.
Ingredients, allergen statements, preparation directions, serving information and formulations can vary between brands and markets. Product packaging or current manufacturer information is more appropriate than assuming every version of a food behaves or contains the same things.
Guidance, labels, policies, product formulations and other time-sensitive information may become outdated. Where the current position matters, RecipeWanted should check the relevant information again rather than rely on an old reference.
Linking to a government body, manufacturer, university, organisation or other external source does not mean that organisation has reviewed, approved or endorsed RecipeWanted. The wording around a reference should not imply otherwise.
If a reference becomes outdated, a destination disappears or stronger evidence changes the understanding of a material point, the affected content can be reviewed and the reference, wording or guidance updated.
Source Selection
Source choice should follow the decision being supported rather than using one type of reference for every page.
| Information Type | Useful Evidence | Review Expectation |
|---|---|---|
| Everyday cooking technique | Established culinary knowledge, practical testing, appropriate culinary references and internally consistent cooking logic. | Check that the explanation matches the ingredients, method and expected result. Avoid unnecessary certainty where kitchens or ingredients vary. |
| Food safety & storage | Current official or otherwise authoritative food-safety guidance appropriate to the subject and audience. | Check freshness carefully and distinguish general education from local rules, professional procedures or individual risk requirements. |
| Ingredients & allergens | Current product labels, manufacturer information and reliable ingredient-specific references where needed. | Do not infer allergen status or formulation across brands. Users with sensitive requirements should verify the product they actually intend to use. |
| Substitutions & measurements | Ingredient properties, practical culinary references, conversion logic and appropriate testing or comparison. | Explain material changes in texture, structure, moisture, flavour or cooking behaviour instead of treating every conversion or replacement as exact. |
| Changing or current information | Recent primary, official or directly responsible sources where available. | Confirm that the information is still current before presenting it as the present position. |
| Commercial or partner claims | Evidence appropriate to the specific claim, together with clear information about the commercial relationship. | Commercial involvement should not lower the evidential threshold or turn supplied marketing language into an unsupported editorial statement. |
User Verification
Product labels, local food-safety guidance, appliance instructions, organisation policies and individual dietary requirements can all differ. Where one of those details materially affects the decision, RecipeWanted should make that limitation visible rather than pretending a general page can resolve it universally.
Found an outdated reference, broken source or material factual issue? Report it to RecipeWanted.
AI-Assisted Content
RecipeWanted may use AI to support drafting, structuring, classification, formatting and quality checks. The use of AI does not change the standards applied to published content: cooking information should still be coherent, appropriately supported, responsibly worded and open to correction.
It may help organise information, draft or transform copy, classify content, prepare structured fields or identify potential inconsistencies. Its output is not considered reliable merely because it was generated confidently or in the correct format.
Automated and editorial controls can check structure, required fields, ingredient and method consistency, duplication, claim wording, classification and other predictable failure points before content is treated as ready for publication.
Food safety, allergens, health-sensitive wording, changing factual information and ambiguous claims should not rely on AI confidence alone. The level of verification or human judgment should increase when the consequence of an error increases.
AI use does not transfer responsibility to a model or software provider. If published content is unclear, unsupported, misleading or materially incorrect, it remains subject to RecipeWanted's review and correction processes.
Controlled Workflow
RecipeWanted can combine automated validation, editorial rules, source checks and human judgment according to the type of content and the risk involved.
Establish what the content needs to do, the structure it requires and any claims or topics needing additional care.
AI may draft, organise, classify or transform material rather than being given unrestricted authority over the final page.
Structure, internal consistency, required fields, claims and other known failure modes can be tested before publication.
Sensitive, uncertain or consequential information should receive the additional verification appropriate to the decision it may influence.
Important Boundary
Concerned about something published on RecipeWanted? Report it for review.
Health, Safety & Nutrition Boundaries
RecipeWanted provides general cooking, recipe and food-education information. When a subject moves into medical needs, allergies, food-safety risk or controlled organisational use, the platform should make that boundary visible rather than implying that general cooking guidance can resolve the decision for every user or setting.
RecipeWanted may explain ingredients, cooking choices, portions and general dietary context. It should not diagnose a condition, prescribe a diet, claim that food will treat or prevent disease, or replace individual medical or dietetic advice.
Formulations, labels, manufacturing environments and cross-contact risks can differ between products and markets. RecipeWanted can explain substitution principles and label awareness, but users with allergy-related requirements need to verify the ingredients and products they actually use.
Safety-sensitive advice can depend on the food, handling conditions, temperature, timing and the people being served. RecipeWanted should distinguish general education from situations where current official guidance or professional procedures matter.
Schools, care environments, workplaces, professional kitchens and other organisations can have their own policies, duties and risk controls. RecipeWanted content may support learning or discussion, but those organisations remain responsible for checking suitability against their own requirements.
Heightened Review
The objective is not to make every food page defensive. It is to recognise when the consequence of an incorrect assumption is high enough to justify stronger verification, narrower wording or a clearer direction for the user to check elsewhere.
Ingredient similarity does not establish allergen safety. Product labels and cross-contact information may still need direct verification.
Avoid false precision or universal assumptions where actual handling conditions and current food-safety guidance matter.
Keep guidance general and avoid turning cooking information into personalised medical or dietary recommendations.
General cooking guidance should not override advice or precautions appropriate to the individual's circumstances.
RecipeWanted should not convert general ingredient information into a personalised plan for managing a medical condition.
Recipes and education content should be checked against the organisation's own procedures, policies and applicable requirements before operational use.
Decision Rule
Found wording that may cross one of these boundaries? Report it for review.
Correction & Update Policy
Recipes, guidance, references and page information can need correction as new information appears or a problem becomes visible. RecipeWanted treats meaningful corrections as part of normal publishing responsibility rather than assuming published content should remain unchanged indefinitely.
Correction Lifecycle
A reported concern is not automatically assumed to be correct, but it should be assessable. The response should reflect both the evidence available and the potential consequence for users.
A report may involve a recipe inconsistency, factual issue, outdated reference, safety-sensitive statement, broken route, accessibility problem, misleading claim or another material problem with the published page.
The surrounding content, supporting evidence and likely user consequence should be considered before deciding whether the issue needs immediate intervention, a substantive correction or routine maintenance.
A correction may alter a sentence, ingredient, method step, source, safety boundary, link, structured field or larger section. The scale of the edit should follow the problem being corrected.
Where an issue reveals a wider pattern, related content, templates, automated checks, editorial rules or publishing workflows can also be reviewed so the same failure is less likely to recur.
Correction Priority
Examples include unsafe handling guidance, allergy-sensitive errors, serious ingredient contradictions or wording that improperly implies medical, regulatory or professional authority.
Examples include missing steps, incorrect timings, significant substitution errors, misleading references or content that could produce a substantially different outcome.
Broken non-critical links, unclear headings, formatting defects, duplicated wording and other lower-consequence issues can be handled through normal maintenance and improvement.
Correction Scope
Where necessary, review can extend beyond the exact line that first revealed the problem.
Ingredients, method steps, timings, explanations, substitutions, serving guidance and other practical information.
References, factual context, source links and information that has become outdated or is no longer sufficiently supported.
Health, allergy, food-safety, commercial or other wording that needs clearer limits or less certainty.
Broken links, accessibility problems, navigation, labels, layout or other technical issues that materially affect use.
Accessibility & User Experience
Useful information loses value when the page around it creates unnecessary friction. RecipeWanted aims to make recipes, education and supporting content understandable across common devices, navigable with clear structure and usable without relying on decorative presentation alone.
Headings, paragraphs, labels and important notes should use readable sizing, sensible spacing and sufficient contrast. Long or complex subjects should be broken into a structure that helps users locate the part they actually need.
RecipeWanted aims to use meaningful headings, appropriate lists, properly structured tables, descriptive links and labelled regions so page relationships are clearer for both visual browsing and assistive technologies.
Links and controls should use understandable labels, visible states and usable focus treatment. Core information should not depend on hover behaviour, colour alone or an unnecessarily difficult interaction.
Content should reflow cleanly, controls should remain usable by touch and important information should not disappear because the user is on a phone or tablet. Wide data such as comparison tables should have a usable narrow-screen treatment.
Pages should avoid unnecessary weight, disruptive movement and avoidable delays that make recipes or guidance harder to use. Images, embeds and other media should be handled with the wider reading experience in mind.
Advertising, affiliate links, sponsorships and commercial actions should remain distinguishable from core cooking guidance and should not hide important instructions, safety information or the route a user needs to complete their task.
Practical Test
Commercial Independence & Disclosure
RecipeWanted may use advertising, affiliate relationships, sponsorships and other commercial collaborations to support the platform. Those relationships should be identifiable to users and should not lower the standards applied to cooking information, evidence, safety boundaries or corrections.
Sponsored, affiliate or otherwise commercial content should be presented with enough context for the user to understand that a commercial relationship exists. Promotion should not be disguised as independent safety or educational authority.
Commercial involvement should not determine RecipeWanted's food-safety wording, allergen boundaries, correction decisions, evidence standards or conclusions about what users should understand from a piece of cooking information.
Marketing language supplied by a brand or partner does not automatically become an editorial fact. Material claims should be handled according to the same relevance, evidence and certainty standards applied elsewhere on RecipeWanted.
Commercial placements should not hide recipe instructions, interrupt important safety information, create misleading navigation or add unnecessary friction to the user's cooking or learning task.
Commercial Context
The exact disclosure can depend on the relationship, but the underlying principle is consistent: users should not have to guess when commercial interests are relevant to what they are seeing.
Advertising should remain distinguishable from RecipeWanted's core editorial and educational information.
Product or retailer links that form part of an affiliate relationship should not be presented as independent certification, medical necessity or universal product suitability.
Where commercial support contributes to a resource or campaign, that support should be made clear without allowing sponsorship to create false safety, approval or compliance authority.
Collaborative work should still follow the relevant RecipeWanted standards for claims, sources, accessibility, corrections and practical user value.
Commercial Boundary
Next Steps
RecipeWanted uses this standard as a public framework for practical cooking information, evidence, AI-assisted workflows, higher-risk topics, corrections, accessibility and commercial independence. The aim is straightforward: useful cooking information with clearer limits, stronger accountability and room to improve.
