Editorial policy.

These rules define how reviewscorer researches, writes, updates, and publishes review pages. They exist to keep public records useful to readers, search engines, and answer engines without exposing internal editorial work.

Standards we apply.

The same rules apply to review pages, category copy, articles, and public API data.

Evidence and citationsPublic claims must be backed by visible sources that a reader can inspect. Editors prefer official pages, support and legal pages, app store listings, business profiles, public documentation, and independent search results.
Scoring and ratingsPublic scores use visible content, approved editorial notes, and cited review signals. Editors can manually mark a page as pending or needing review when that status should be visible to readers.
Internal investigationsInternal editorial records can exist while editors research a website. They are not listed in public routes, search results, sitemaps, public APIs, llms.txt, or visible navigation until approved for readers.
Corrections and revisionsPublished records can be updated when stronger evidence appears. Editorial changes are tracked internally so admins can review previous states and restore content when needed.
AI-assisted toolsAI tools may help editors draft outlines, check SEO metadata, or suggest internal links, but AI output is never auto-published. A human editor remains responsible for publication.
Conflicts and removalsCommercial influence, affiliate incentives, or owner submissions must not override the evidence. Requests for correction are handled through editorial review rather than automatic removal.