STANDARDS / EDITORIAL
Editorial Standards
Our editorial standard is useful explanation grounded in traceable evidence, with clear responsibility and honest limits on what has been checked.
Last updated:
Match the claim to its evidence
An important factual claim should be supported by an identifiable source that actually addresses it. Original documents, research papers, technical documentation and direct observations are preferred where appropriate.
A press release is evidence of an announcement, not independent verification of its performance claims. An image licence establishes reuse terms, not the truth of the article. Several accounts of one study do not automatically constitute independent corroboration.
Add something useful
A piece should offer a useful explanation, comparison, calculation, practical decision aid or original observation. Length alone does not establish value.
Methods must identify what was measured, what was calculated from stated assumptions, what was supplied by a source and what remains our interpretation. We do not invent interviews, experiments or first-hand experience.
Authorization and review are different
A request to prepare and publish a story authorizes work; it does not establish that the editor personally checked every source, sentence or calculation. AI-assisted verification is not a human or independent expert review.
For new or materially revised work, editorial sign-off should identify the exact version, the named reviewer and the checks actually completed. If only publication was authorized, the disclosure must not claim a personal fact-check or independent review.
Some archive articles were prepared and published under general editorial requests. Older wording that suggests more extensive checks requires review against the actual approval record. These standards do not certify the archive retroactively.
Attribution, fairness and uncertainty
We distinguish an announced product, a shipment, broad availability and measured performance. Uncertainty should be visible where it affects the reader's understanding or decision.
When materially criticising a person or organisation, we seek a reasonable opportunity for response where appropriate and feasible. We say whether a response was sought or obtained; silence is not proof.
Corrections and updates
A material factual correction should carry a dated explanation attached to the affected article. A clarification improves precision; an update adds new information. Publication and update dates have different meanings.
Changing a date without a substantive change is not an editorial update. Readers can send evidence and correction requests to the editor.