Evidence, judgment,
and clear boundaries.

Source hierarchy

Purchase-critical and product claims should be supported by current primary sources: official product pages, pricing, documentation, security and privacy materials, terms, release notes, and accountable vendor statements. Independent testing and reputable reporting can add context but do not silently override a primary fact.

Reviews and scores

Profiles combine structured facts with an accountable editorial assessment. We state what the product is for, where it differs, who should avoid it, and when facts were reviewed. Scores follow the public methodology.

AI assistance

Automation may help structure drafts, normalize data, identify potential drift, and run quality checks. Publication still requires evidence-linked records and editorial accountability. Generated prose is not itself a source.

Two tiers make that visible. A reviewed dossier carries an editor's judgment and a fact-check date. A listed dossier was drafted from the vendor's official pages by our pipeline, passed schema and evidence gates (every claim links to a page we read), and was published under a fixed automatic cap; it is labeled as not yet editor-reviewed on its page, its confidence factors are capped below reviewed levels, and it moves to the reviewed tier only after an editor checks it.

Commercial independence

Advertisers and verified makers do not approve reviews, control verdicts, or buy rank. Sponsored surfaces are labeled and governed separately.

Updates

Material factual changes update the canonical record, downstream pages, structured data, API, and discovery files together. The public review date changes only after the relevant claims are checked.