Editorial and review policy

Standards applied before publication

Intent before volume

Each guide must answer a distinct reader decision. Cosmetic keyword variations are consolidated instead of becoming separate pages.

Traceable primary sources

Claims use standards bodies, government guidance, official technical documentation, or original research where those sources are available.

Release gates

Published guides pass checks for depth, metadata, duplicate intent, section substance, source diversity, links, and crawlable rendering.

What the review labels mean

Every article visibly names its reviewer. Expert-reviewed means Kennedy Gichobi reviewed the guide and its engineering judgment before release. It does not imply legal, medical, regulatory, or other professional certification.

Fact-checked means the article was checked against its listed sources and the reviewer named on the page. When the reviewer is “OpenAI Codex research review,” the page used AI-assisted research and consistency checks; that label is disclosed rather than presented as human expert review.

Drafts are not included in the public library, sitemap, or RSS feed.

AI assistance and human responsibility

AI tools may assist with research discovery, structure, consistency checks, link auditing, and draft development. AI output is not treated as a source. Factual support must trace to the references shown on the article or to clearly identified engineering reasoning.

The library avoids fabricated experience, invented search volume, false performance claims, unsupported professional conclusions, and pages produced only to capture wording variations.

Corrections, updates, and source health

Material corrections update the article modified date. Minor typography changes do not receive artificial freshness dates. Confirmed missing source links block publication until repaired or replaced.

To report a possible error, include the article URL, statement, and supporting evidence through the contact page.