How we write
Editorial standards
Updated September 5, 2026
What we publish should help people understand the work and make their own decisions. These are the standards we aim to meet.
Make claims people can check
We link to the original source when a factual claim depends on outside research. A source should support the particular claim we’re making, with enough context to understand its limits.
Say what’s known
We distinguish work delivered from benefits we’ve measured. An estimate, a plan, and a result are different things. When we’re unsure, that belongs with the claim.
Be clear about AI assistance
AI helps draft this website and some project materials. We’re responsible for what we publish. When AI is part of a project, we explain its role and what still needs a person’s judgment.
Give people and sources credit
Community projects depend on the people already doing the work. We explain our part without taking credit for theirs, and disclose relationships that matter to understanding an example.
Correct mistakes
If something looks wrong, please email Victor with the page and the part you’re concerned about. We’ll check it and correct errors we find. A correction that changes the meaning of a piece should be explained.