One clear learning point.
Each LittleHanzi story introduces one core character, its featured reading and meaning, and a practical example. Short English narration and a small recognition question keep the focus narrow. We do not label one story as a complete lesson in all the uses of a character.
We choose ordinary adult situations and direct language. The goal is a story with a beginning, a change and an ending, rather than dialogue written only to deliver a definition.
Stories are fiction. Facts need support.
Alex, Lin, their dialogue and their experiences are invented. They are recurring fictional people, and each story is independently readable. We do not turn one imagined encounter into a claim about everyone who lives in China.
Definitions, pronunciation, historical explanations and cultural statements need their own support. If a claim cannot be reliably checked, we narrow it or leave it out. A memorable comparison can be used as a learning aid, but must not be presented as the actual historical origin of a character.
Use references for specific claims.
Language review should check the written form, the appropriate reading, tone-marked pinyin, English gloss and example expression together. A character’s isolated reading and its pronunciation in a word may need separate attention.
Sources should be dictionaries, educational references or other material suited to the claim. Our editorial records keep the title, author or organization when available, URL, access date and the specific learning point supported. Referencing a page does not imply endorsement by its publisher.
A short English gloss is intentionally limited. Where a character has multiple readings or senses, the story teaches the one relevant to its scene. We avoid adding an etymological or cultural explanation merely to make a lesson appear more substantial.
Review the image and the sound.
Illustrations should preserve character identity, clothing, objects, scene order and the relationship between indoors and outdoors. Alt text describes the relevant action. Text used for teaching is rendered as actual page text so a malformed generated glyph is not passed off as a learning example.
Digital and AI-assisted tools may be used in production. A generated file is a candidate for review, not proof of accuracy. Records distinguish generated, uploaded, externally licensed and development-placeholder material. Placeholder files cannot satisfy a formal publication check.
Audio must be a usable file with the intended reading. Technical playback and pronunciation review are different checks: a file can decode correctly and still need listening review. A development voice or unfinished illustration is not described as a completed, professionally verified teaching asset.
Animations should support the scene without preventing reading. Pronunciation is user-initiated; motion has a pause control or a static alternative, and reduced-motion preferences are respected.
Publish reviewed work and keep its history.
Publication requires the essential character information, a complete sequence of scenes, usable approved media, alternative text, a valid recognition question and relevant sources. Editorial and media review are separate requirements. Scheduled work stays private until it is due and meets the same checks.
A local development preview can expose an explicitly marked draft for evaluation. That does not change its published status. Public lists, story routes and the sitemap should include only eligible material.
Edits are versioned, and a stale editor should not silently overwrite a newer version. Replacing media preserves the earlier file so a change can be traced. We do not silently replace human-edited stories by rerunning an import.
The visible library reflects actual released stories. We do not invent course counts, teacher qualifications, reviews, ratings or daily publication claims to fill a page.
When something needs correcting.
A useful correction report includes the story URL, the exact text or scene, what seems wrong, and a source or explanation where available. For audio, identify the character or expression and describe the sound you expected.
Send reports through the method published on the contact page. Do not include personal information unrelated to the issue.
The issue should be checked against the original material and relevant references. A substantive correction may require a text change, replacement media or temporary withdrawal while the problem is resolved. Editorial versions preserve the change; the current site does not claim to have a public correction log for every past edit.
Accessibility and usability reports matter too. If the problem depends on a device or browser, include enough detail to reproduce it without sending private account information.