Editorial Guidelines

Our comprehensive standards for accuracy, transparency, and editorial integrity that guide every piece of content published on Quixotry.

Verified StandardsFact-CheckedTransparent Process

Core Editorial Principles

Accuracy First

Every technical claim, benchmark result, and specification undergoes rigorous verification against primary sources and independent testing.

Complete Transparency

All sources, methodologies, potential conflicts of interest, and editorial processes are disclosed openly to maintain reader trust.

Editorial Integrity

Independent editorial judgment guides all content decisions, with clear separation between editorial content and any commercial interests.

Fact-Checking Process

1

Primary Source Verification

All technical specifications, performance claims, and company statements are verified against official documentation, press releases, and regulatory filings.

Required Sources Include:

  • • Official company documentation and press releases
  • • Peer-reviewed research papers and academic publications
  • • Government and regulatory agency reports
  • • Independent third-party testing results
2

Independent Verification

Whenever possible, we conduct independent testing and analysis to verify performance claims and technical specifications.

Testing Standards:

  • • Controlled testing environments with documented conditions
  • • Multiple test runs to ensure reproducibility
  • • Comparison with established benchmarks and industry standards
  • • Clear documentation of test methodologies and limitations
3

Expert Review

Technical content is reviewed by subject matter experts with relevant industry experience and academic credentials.

Review Criteria:

  • • Technical accuracy and completeness
  • • Appropriate context and industry perspective
  • • Clarity and accessibility for target audience
  • • Proper citation and attribution of sources

Source Requirements

Primary Sources

Required for All Claims:

  • • Company annual reports and SEC filings
  • • Official product specifications and datasheets
  • • Peer-reviewed research publications
  • • Government agency reports and standards
  • • Direct interviews with company representatives

Secondary Sources

Supplementary Context:

  • • Industry analyst reports (with clear attribution)
  • • Reputable technology journalism (properly cited)
  • • Professional conference presentations
  • • Technical forums and developer documentation

Sources We Do Not Accept

  • • Unverified social media posts or rumors
  • • Anonymous sources without corroboration
  • • Promotional materials without independent verification
  • • Wikipedia or other user-generated content as primary sources
  • • Outdated information without current verification

Benchmark & Testing Standards

Testing Environment Requirements

Hardware Standards:

  • • Controlled thermal conditions (documented ambient temperature)
  • • Consistent power delivery and measurement
  • • Standardized test systems with documented specifications
  • • Multiple hardware samples when possible

Software Standards:

  • • Latest stable drivers and firmware
  • • Documented software versions and settings
  • • Standardized benchmark suites with version numbers
  • • Clear documentation of any custom configurations

Methodology Disclosure

Every benchmark and performance analysis includes a detailed methodology section covering:

  • • Complete hardware specifications
  • • Software versions and driver details
  • • Test procedures and number of runs
  • • Statistical analysis methods
  • • Environmental conditions during testing
  • • Margin of error and confidence intervals
  • • Limitations and potential sources of bias
  • • Reproducibility instructions

Editorial Review Process

1

Initial Review

Content is reviewed for accuracy, completeness, and adherence to editorial standards. All sources are verified and fact-checked during this stage.

2

Technical Review

Subject matter experts review technical accuracy, methodology, and industry context. Benchmarks and performance claims receive additional scrutiny.

3

Final Editorial Review

Senior editorial team conducts final review for clarity, tone, and overall quality before publication approval.

Corrections & Updates Policy

Error Correction Process

Minor Corrections:

Typographical errors, formatting issues, and minor factual corrections are made promptly with a note in the article's update log.

Major Corrections:

Significant factual errors, methodology issues, or substantial content changes are clearly marked with correction notices at the top of the article.

Update Transparency

All articles include a visible update log showing:

  • • Date and time of updates
  • • Nature of changes made
  • • Reason for the update
  • • Editorial staff responsible for the change

Editorial Contact Information

Report Errors

Found an inaccuracy or error in our content?

[email protected]

Editorial Questions

Questions about our editorial process or standards?

[email protected]

General Feedback

General comments or suggestions about our content?

[email protected]

AI Assistance Disclosure

Transparency in AI Use

We believe in complete transparency about the tools and processes used in content creation. When AI assistance is used in any capacity, we clearly disclose:

  • • The specific AI tools or services utilized
  • • The extent and nature of AI assistance provided
  • • Human oversight and editorial responsibility
  • • Final review and approval processes

Editorial Responsibility: All content published on Quixotry undergoes human editorial review and approval, regardless of any AI assistance used in the creation process. Our editorial team maintains full responsibility for accuracy, quality, and editorial decisions.