Editorial standards.

Evidence and sourcing

Measured facts come from published benchmark artifacts. Provider-stated facts are attributed to provider-owned sources. Editorial interpretation must be traceable to one of those evidence classes and may not turn a missing fact into an estimate.

Numeric claims need a matching public data path. Comparisons need peer evidence from a compatible proxy class and benchmark window. Pricing and product facts must be current enough for the claim; stale or unavailable sources are disclosed rather than silently filled.

Interpretation

• Measurements describe the observed sample and window, not every request a buyer will ever make.
• Provider marketing language remains a provider claim unless the benchmark independently measures it.
• A caveat is displayed near the conclusion it qualifies.
• A diagnostic result may retain a computed score or dimension grade when its inputs are complete, but it cannot become an eligible rank, recommendation, or market-leadership claim.
• Headlines and summaries must not outrun the comparison set or the evidence on the page.

Automation and editorial review

Benchmark measurements and aggregate report publication are software-assisted. A series configured for automatic publication may publish only when candidate publication-readiness checks and current scoring-contract structure checks pass. Ranking eligibility and baseline-gate outcomes remain separate and may leave that ready publication diagnostic-only and unranked. Automated benchmark publication is not represented as human sign-off.

Buyer-facing provider reviews are a separate editorial artifact. They require approved source coverage, claim-level validation, and an explicit approval before publication.

Provider responses

• A provider may challenge a factual statement, source interpretation, attribution, or data-processing error.
• A response does not directly alter a measurement, score, rank, or placement.
• A verified data or publication error produces a visible correction and, for immutable reports, a new revision.
• A provider's operational change belongs in a new test window or retest; it does not rewrite what an earlier window observed.
• Relevant provider context may be appended or cited when it helps readers understand the evidence, with the source and timing made clear.

Corrections and updates

Published benchmark reports are immutable. A material correction creates a new revision with a timestamp and reason; the historical URL remains readable and points to the current publication.

Code-authored articles may be updated in place. When a material change is made, the article must show the modified date and a correction note that explains what changed. Methodology changes apply prospectively and do not silently rescore historical reports.

• Read the corrections policy and revision log

Funding and conflicts

Funding, sponsorship, affiliate, gifts, credits, and advance-access relationships belong in the publication's About page and beside benchmark evidence where relevant. A commercial relationship may not suppress a result, waive a gate, or change placement.

The accountable owner has not yet attested those relationship facts for publication. Until that review is complete, Proxy Index labels the disclosure as pending instead of making a categorical independence, self-funding, sponsorship, affiliate, gift, purchasing, or advance-access claim.

Publication checklist

1. Confirm the artifact names its benchmark window, methodology or scoring contract, and publication timestamp.
2. Confirm gate, dimension, sample, confidence, coverage, and caveat evidence agree across the payload and presentation.
3. Confirm every numeric and comparative editorial claim resolves to an approved source or public data path.
4. Confirm provider-stated facts are attributed and source freshness is acceptable or explicitly qualified.
5. Confirm diagnostic-only evidence is not presented as an eligible rank, recommendation, or market-leadership claim; any retained score or dimension grade must remain explicitly diagnostic.
6. Confirm redaction removes credentials, endpoint details, raw observations, raw errors, and observed exit IPs.
7. Confirm funding and conflict disclosures remain accurate.
8. Confirm a human approval is recorded for provider-line editorial reviews; do not imply one for an auto-published benchmark.
9. Confirm correction ancestry and the current-publication pointer are intact before replacing a current report.