Trust and standards
Editorial Policy
How Indexora decides what to publish, how each claim is checked, and how we correct the record when we get something wrong.
Publishing standards
Search advice is easy to repeat and hard to verify. These standards exist so a reader can trace any recommendation back to its source.
Last reviewed .
- Sourcing
- Claims about how search works are tied to primary sources first: Google Search documentation, official statements, patents or observable behaviour. Where we rely on a third-party study, we name it and link to it so you can check the original.
- Evidence over opinion
- Guidance is separated into three labels. Documented facts point to a primary source. Test results point to a Lab experiment with its method and limitations. Interpretation is our reading of the evidence, and it is marked as such.
- Author accountability
- Every editorial and Lab article is attributed to a named author who is responsible for its accuracy. Author experience and areas of expertise are described on the About page.
- Independence and disclosure
- Indexora is not an SEO agency and does not publish sponsored placements disguised as editorial work. If a commercial relationship could influence a recommendation, it is disclosed inline and in the affiliate disclosure.
How an article is reviewed
- 01
Draft
The author writes from primary sources and, where relevant, from a documented Lab test rather than from memory or from other blog posts.
- 02
Technical review
Every claim is checked against current Google documentation or a reproducible observation. Statements that cannot be supported are removed or reframed as interpretation.
- 03
Publish with context
Articles ship with a publish date, a clear scope and links to the supporting evidence, related Insights, Skills or Playbooks.
- 04
Scheduled re-review
Search changes quickly. Time-sensitive guidance is revisited when Google ships a relevant update or when a Lab result contradicts an earlier claim.
Corrections and updates
Being wrong in public is part of research. We fix errors openly rather than quietly deleting them.
When a material error changes the meaning of an article, we correct the text and note that it was updated. Minor fixes such as typos or broken links are made without a note.
If a Lab result later contradicts published guidance, we update the guidance and link to the newer evidence so both are visible.
Spotted something inaccurate? Send the URL and the detail to aiden.zhou12581@gmail.com and we will review it.