Editorial standards

Expert review process

A transparent author-review workflow; reviewer names and status are shown only when recorded. Last reviewed: 23 July 2026.

  1. 1. Define scope and risk

    The author defines the audience, intended decision, exclusions and consequences of error. Safety, legal, chemical, financial and standards-dependent claims receive stricter source and limitation checks.

  2. 2. Verify sources

    Primary and authoritative sources are preferred. Dates, revisions and links are checked, and proprietary standards content is not reconstructed.

  3. 3. Test calculations and examples

    Formulas are checked against stated assumptions. Software changes receive automated tests, accessibility checks and representative boundary cases before release.

  4. 4. Author review and status

    The author checks technical meaning, practical applicability, ambiguity and overclaiming. Pages may remain review-pending; the site does not imply a named reviewer or completed review when none is recorded.

  5. 5. Review date and triggers

    Material pages carry a reviewed date where supported. A new standard edition, regulation, broken source, reported error or significant calculator change triggers reassessment.

Stay in touch

New chapters, delivered quietly.

A short note when a new story, reflection or milestone is added. No noise, no spam — unsubscribe with a single click.