Editorial Policy

We plan pages around distinct search intent rather than publishing multiple thin pages that repeat the same information. A page is expanded only when the topic has its own user question, evidence set, and useful answer.

Primary sources such as official product pages, terms, privacy policies, and company announcements are preferred for product claims. Reputable reporting and independent hands-on tests are used for outside observations, real-world task examples, and reported failure modes.

Official claims, independent tests, community reports, and unverified proposals are not treated as equivalent evidence. The task database records an evidence level, known limitations, sources, and a lastVerified date so readers can see how strong a capability claim is.

We do not invent prices, plan names, invite quantities, launch dates, supported countries, product capabilities, funding details, or technical architecture when reliable public evidence is unavailable. Unknown information is labeled as unknown or pending verification.

Commercial relationships will be disclosed when relevant. Advertising, sponsorships, newsletters, or future tools must not change the evidence standard used for editorial claims or comparisons.

Corrections are prioritized when a primary source changes, a dated fact becomes stale, a task no longer works as described, or a source materially contradicts an existing page.