Editorial policy

Authorship and review

Every article and report states who wrote it, who reviewed it (where a technical or tax review applies), when it was published, and when it was last reviewed. Where a named qualified reviewer has not yet been engaged for a given topic, the page says "technical review pending" rather than inventing a reviewer, qualification or quote.

What we won't do

• Invent authors, reviewers, qualifications, quotes, testimonials or case studies.
• Present an estimate or projection as a guarantee.
• Claim a live statistic (visitor counts, project counts, savings totals) that isn't real and current.
• Publish a benchmark figure before we have enough verified data to make it meaningful (see our sample-size rule on the sources page).

Sourcing

Meaningful quantitative public claims should be traceable to a source. We prefer primary, authoritative sources — GOV.UK, DESNZ, Ofgem, HMRC, National Grid, DNOs, the EU Joint Research Centre's PVGIS tool, and MCS documentation where relevant.

Corrections

If something is wrong, tell us — see corrections. We fix errors and record what changed rather than quietly editing published material.