Team, Methodology and Review Process
This page exists so that you can judge our data instead of trusting it. It describes who produces the content, how a record gets from an official page into our tables, what we do when sources disagree, when a record is re-verified, and what we are not qualified to say.
1. Who works on this site
This is an independently operated project. It is not run by a company, an agency, a consultancy or a commercial content team, and it is not affiliated with any embassy, consulate or government body. Content is written and source-checked by the operator; where a review requires a credential, the reviewer is named with that credential in section 7.
We deliberately do not describe a "team of experts" or quote a headcount. The project is small, and the only claims made about it are ones a reader can check: a named contact address, a stated source hierarchy, a stated update trigger, and a reviewer list that stays empty until real reviewers have actually signed off. The operator's identity and background are supplied to anyone who asks at the contact address — see Contact Us.
2. How a record is produced
- Source gathering. Only pages published by an embassy, consulate, visa application centre, or government department are used as primary material. Aggregators, forums, agency blogs and social posts are not sources; at most they are a lead worth checking.
- Field extraction. Each record carries sixteen fields — visa type, entry mode, processing time, validity, maximum stay, fee, refusal risk, risk notes, required documents, invitation requirement, filing channel, region, update month, source link, and the two language labels.
- Cross-verification. Where a second official source exists (a consulate page versus a central portal, or two consular districts), both are read. Agreement is recorded; disagreement is written into the risk notes rather than averaged away.
- Risk annotation. The refusal-risk indicator is a judgement about paperwork and interview exposure, not a probability. Where risk is high, the reason is written out in the same record so you can see the basis and disagree with it.
- Language pass. The Chinese and English versions are produced as a pair and reconciled field by field, so that a figure is never present in one language and missing in the other.
- Publication. The record goes live with its update month and source link, so you can always see when it was last checked and where it came from.
3. Source hierarchy
| Tier | Source type | How we use it |
|---|---|---|
| A | Embassy / consulate / immigration authority / government portal | Authoritative. A figure in our tables must trace to a Tier A page. |
| B | Official visa application centre (outsourced partner of a mission) | Accepted for logistics: appointment process, submission channels, local fees. |
| C | Official trade, chamber-of-commerce or exhibition-organiser guidance | Used only to explain a business-travel context, never as a source of a legal requirement. |
| D | Media, agency pages, forums, social posts | Not a source. May raise a question; the question is settled at Tier A or not at all. |
Where a Tier A source is silent on something travellers routinely ask about, we say so in the record instead of filling the gap with a Tier D guess.
4. When a record is re-verified
- Scheduled: records are re-checked on a rolling cycle, so that no record goes indefinitely without a fresh look.
- Event-driven: immediately on a reported policy change, a fee revision, a new visa-free or exemption arrangement, a suspension, or a change in a major programme (for example the introduction or expansion of a digital entry/exit system).
- Reader-driven: on any correction report that names an official source. See Contact Us for what to send.
Each update changes the record's update month. We do not backdate, and we do not silently edit a figure — a changed figure gets a new update month, so the reference date you rely on stays honest.
5. When official sources disagree with each other
It happens, most often between consular districts and between a central portal and a local mission. Our rule is to prefer the source that governs the application you are actually making — which usually means the mission that will decide it — and to record the divergence in the risk notes so you are not surprised by the version applied to you.
6. Conflict of interest
- The site is funded by display advertising. Advertisers and ad networks have no influence over which countries we cover, what the records say, or whether a country is marked high-risk.
- We do not sell visa agency, filing, appointment or document-preparation services, and the site does not carry paid placement inside the country reference tables.
- We do not accept payment in exchange for a favourable risk rating, a listing, or the removal of a risk note.
7. Named reviewers
Where a review requires a credential, the reviewer is named on this page with that credential and the scope of what they reviewed — a table below, once names exist to put in it.
At the time of writing, no reviewer has signed off yet. We are not going to invent one to fill the space: an unsigned review is not a review, and a fabricated name and credential is worse than an empty table. So the mechanism is what we publish instead:
- Records that have not yet been through named review are labelled "pending expert review" on the record itself — so the absence of a signature is visible where you read the data, not only here.
- The label is removed only when a named reviewer has actually checked that record and their name and credential have been added to this page.
- Until then, treat every record as source-checked by the operator, but not independently reviewed. That is a weaker guarantee than a reviewed record, and we would rather you knew it than assumed otherwise.
If you hold a relevant credential — immigration practice, consular processing, corporate travel compliance — and want to review a set of records, write to Contact Us.
8. What each field means
Every country record carries the same sixteen fields. Knowing what they do and do not mean is most of the work of reading this site correctly.
| Field | What it holds, and its limits |
|---|---|
| Visa type | The visa or entry category the record describes. A country usually has several; the record covers the business-travel relevant one. |
| Entry mode | How you get in: visa-free, visa on arrival, e-visa, or embassy application. Includes the conditions attached (for example, requiring a valid third-country visa). |
| Processing time | Published processing time. Never a promise. Consular districts differ, seasons differ, and a single missing document resets the clock. |
| Validity | How long the issued visa is usable for — not how long you may stay. A 10-year visa with a 180-day maximum stay is normal, not a contradiction. |
| Maximum stay | The ceiling per entry or per period, as the official source states it. The officer at the border may admit you for less. |
| Fee | Converted to CNY for comparison, with the original currency in brackets. Conversion is indicative; you pay in the local currency. |
| Refusal risk | Low / medium / high — a judgement about paperwork and interview exposure, not a probability, and not a prediction about you. |
| Risk notes | The reasoning behind that indicator, plus the traps that actually cause refusals on this route. |
| Required documents | The core list. Treat it as a floor, not a ceiling — the mission may ask for more. |
| Invitation letter | Whether a host invitation is needed, recommended, or not required. |
| Filing channel | Where the application actually goes: embassy, consulate, outsourced centre, or an online portal. |
| Region | Grouping used for filtering. Geographic, not political, and not a statement about any border dispute. |
| Update month | When we last verified the record — not when the rule changed. See section 4 for what triggers a re-check. |
| Source | The official page the record was built from. Always follow it before acting. |
| Chinese / English label | The two language versions of the same record, reconciled field by field so a figure is never present in one language and missing in the other. |
| Pending review flag | Present until a named reviewer has signed off on that record (section 7). |
9. What we are not qualified to do
- Advise on an individual application, refusal, appeal or administrative review.
- Predict outcomes, or offer any form of approval guarantee.
- Interpret your personal immigration history, or tell you how a border officer will exercise discretion.
- Provide filing, appointment or document-preparation services.
For all of these, use the mission that handles your case, or a licensed practitioner in the relevant jurisdiction.
10. Change log of this page
- 2026-09-21 — Page created as part of a site-wide content and transparency review; methodology, source hierarchy, update triggers and conflict-of-interest policy published for the first time.
- 2026-09-21 — Added the field reference (section 8) explaining what each of the sixteen recorded fields means and where its limits are.