Public quality standard
Editorial, evidence and correction policy
Rules version 2026.09 · Last reviewed
Primary-source standard
Legal and accessibility explanations start with EUR-Lex, European Commission, W3C or platform-owner documentation. Secondary commentary may help identify questions but is not treated as the final authority.
Claim boundaries
We distinguish a visible page signal, a missing evidence task, user-supplied evidence and a reviewer decision. We do not turn an automated score into a certification, legal conclusion, product-safety conclusion or marketplace guarantee.
Examples and customer evidence
Fictional examples are labelled as fictional. Customer results, endorsements, benchmarks and case studies are not published without a supportable record and appropriate permission. Generated wording must not invent product hazards, warnings, operator identities or test results.
AI-assisted work
AI may assist drafting, classification or software development, but public claims remain subject to source review, product-boundary checks and automated regression tests. AI output is not used as the sole source for a legal or safety statement.
Updates and corrections
Material changes update the public rules version, review date and changelog. Correction requests can use the support contact shown on the About page; reports should include the affected URL, the disputed statement and a primary source where possible.