Editorial standards

Clarity before volume

An article should answer a recognisable question and distinguish explanation from evidence. We do not invent quotations, experience, affiliations or results to make a story more persuasive. Hypothetical examples must be recognisable as examples.

Sources and change

Original documentation and directly responsible organisations are preferred for factual verification. Specifications, schedules and policies can change. Articles should state relevant conditions and avoid presenting an old observation as a permanent guarantee.

Corrections and participation

Send the article address, the disputed passage and a checkable source. Relevant corrections are reviewed in context. Discussion should address the subject respectfully; personal information, harassment and unrelated promotion are not appropriate contributions.

Commercial transparency

Commercial relationships, supplied products and affiliate links must be identified if they are introduced. Editorial examples do not imply that a company has commissioned, approved or endorsed the article.