Editorial policy
Our editorial policy is short enough to hold to. We publish only what we ordered and tested, and we say plainly when a row is historical rather than current. Every archive entry records the sheet name or code as it appeared, the date we logged it, the agent used and the outcome. We do not edit an archive row to make it look current; when a link dies, we mark it dead and date it.
Scores use a five-point scale, 5 excellent and 1 very poor, written as X / 5. The three editors share one review template: packaging, fit and sizing, material and construction, agent timing, and value against the current listing price. We do not repeat our methodology inside articles; it lives on the methodology page.
We do not accept paid placement in the archive ledger, and no brand or agent can buy a score. Where a product was supplied for review, that is disclosed in the article itself. Author pages on this site are the only profiles we maintain; we do not link out to social accounts.
Scores use a five-point scale, 5 excellent and 1 very poor, written as X / 5. The three editors share one review template: packaging, fit and sizing, material and construction, agent timing, and value against the current listing price. We do not repeat our methodology inside articles; it lives on the methodology page.
We do not accept paid placement in the archive ledger, and no brand or agent can buy a score. Where a product was supplied for review, that is disclosed in the article itself. Author pages on this site are the only profiles we maintain; we do not link out to social accounts.