Accuracy is not optional here. It is the foundation of everything we publish. This page explains how facts are verified, how errors are handled, and how corrections are made visible to readers. It exists to make our standards clear and our process accountable, especially as technology content becomes harder to verify and easier to distort.
This policy applies to all informational, technical, and educational content published on this website, whether written by humans, assisted by tools, or updated over time.
How Facts Are Verified Before Publication
Every article starts with verification, not afterthoughts. Claims are checked before they go live, not corrected quietly later unless something genuinely changes.
Our fact-checking process includes:
• Verifying technical claims against primary documentation such as vendor manuals, standards bodies, official product pages, and technical specifications
• Cross-checking explanations with multiple credible sources when a topic affects security, privacy, or user safety
• Reviewing data points, statistics, and timelines to confirm they are current and accurately represented
• Ensuring terminology is used correctly and consistently, especially for networking, cybersecurity, AI, and emerging technologies
When content explains a process, such as configuration steps or troubleshooting guidance, those steps are reviewed for real-world accuracy. If something cannot be reasonably tested or confirmed, it is clearly framed as informational rather than definitive.
We avoid speculation disguised as certainty. If an area of technology is evolving or disputed, that uncertainty is stated clearly.
Use of Sources and References
Sources matter more than volume. We prioritize clarity and credibility over excessive linking.
Our sources typically include:
• Official documentation from technology vendors and standards organizations
• Reputable research institutions and industry publications
• Security advisories and technical whitepapers
• Direct product testing or observed behavior when applicable
We do not rely on anonymous claims, scraped summaries, or unverified secondary sources for factual assertions. When content draws from general industry consensus rather than a single document, it reflects that consensus honestly without overstating precision.
AI-Assisted Content and Human Oversight
Some content may be created or refined with the help of AI tools. That assistance does not replace human responsibility.
Every published piece is reviewed by a human editor before it goes live. AI output is treated as a draft input, not a final authority. Facts, figures, and technical explanations are checked the same way they would be if written manually.
AI is not used to invent sources, fabricate data, or guess technical behavior. If a tool produces uncertain or unclear information, that content is either verified independently or removed.
The standard does not change based on how content is produced. Accuracy is required either way.
How Errors Are Reported
Despite careful review, mistakes can happen. When they do, readers should be able to report them easily.
If you believe something on this site is incorrect, outdated, misleading, or unclear, you can report it through our contact page. When reporting an issue, please include:
• The page URL
• The specific statement or section in question
• Why you believe it is inaccurate or misleading
• Any supporting source, if available
Reports do not need to be formal or technical. Clear explanations help us investigate faster, but all good-faith reports are reviewed.
We do not ignore correction requests simply because they are inconvenient. Accuracy outweighs pride.
How Corrections Are Reviewed
All reported issues are reviewed by an editor with subject familiarity. The review process includes:
• Re-checking the original claim against current and authoritative sources
• Evaluating whether the issue is factual, contextual, or interpretive
• Determining whether the content needs a correction, clarification, update, or removal
If a claim is confirmed to be incorrect, it is corrected as soon as possible. If the issue involves interpretation or clarity rather than a factual error, the content may be revised to reduce ambiguity.
Not every disagreement results in a correction, but every report is taken seriously and reviewed on its merits.
How Corrections Are Displayed
Corrections are made transparently. We do not silently rewrite content to hide mistakes.
When a factual correction is significant, we follow these practices:
• The incorrect information is corrected directly in the article
• A short correction note is added, explaining what changed and why
• The date of the correction is included
Minor fixes, such as typos or formatting errors that do not affect meaning, may be corrected without a formal note. Anything that changes understanding, accuracy, or guidance is documented.
Readers should always be able to trust that what they are reading reflects our best current understanding, not a quietly patched version of the past.
Correction Logs and Content Updates
Some articles are updated regularly to reflect changes in technology, standards, or best practices. In those cases, updates may include new sections, revised explanations, or removed guidance that is no longer safe or relevant.
When updates materially change an article’s guidance or conclusions, an update note is added to explain the reason. This helps readers understand whether they are seeing a routine refresh or a meaningful shift.
We do not rewrite history. Updates are framed as improvements, not erasures.
Commitment to Transparency
Transparency builds trust faster than perfection ever could.
We aim to be clear about:
• What we know and how we know it
• Where uncertainty exists
• When information has changed
• How readers can challenge or question our work
This policy exists because credibility must be earned continuously, not claimed once. Especially in technical and AI-adjacent topics, confidence without accountability is a liability.
Our goal is simple. When readers rely on this site to make decisions, learn something new, or understand a complex topic, they should feel confident that the information has been checked, corrected when needed, and presented honestly.
If you ever believe we missed that mark, tell us. That feedback is part of how accuracy stays real, not theoretical.