Editorial standards
Last reviewed 2026-07-26
These standards describe how we research, write, review, and correct the guides on this site. They exist so a reader can judge our work without guessing. We would rather under-claim and show our homework than sound authoritative on thin evidence.
Facts are checked against primary material whenever it is available. Product behavior claims are tested against live pages and current product behavior, not against memory or old screenshots. Prices and plan structures are pulled from published rate pages, and we record the date we pulled them. Competitor facts are verified against the competitor's own site or official docs. If we cannot verify a point that way, we either omit it or mark it clearly as unverified. Secondary blogs, undated roundups, and forum hearsay are not enough to carry a factual claim on their own.
When we get something wrong, we fix the page and add a dated note describing what changed. We do not silently rewrite history on reference material. If a correction changes the meaning of a recommendation or a comparison, the note says so in plain language. Cosmetic edits for clarity do not need a note; substance does. Anyone who spots an error can use ops@smsroute.cc or an issue on github.com/SMSRoute-cc as described on the contact page.
There are practices we will not use. We do not invent customer reviews, star ratings, or testimonial quotes. We do not publish fake author names, staff bios, or credentials to simulate a newsroom we do not run. We do not frame pages as independent journalism while burying a commercial relationship. If affiliate links or commercial incentives ever appear, they must be disclosed next to the relevant recommendation, not hidden in a footer. Today these guides exist to reduce confusion in a messy niche and to explain send-side SMS in terms we can stand behind as operators.
Drafts on this site are machine-assisted. That means outline and draft text may be produced with AI tools. Every page is human-reviewed by the engineering team before publish. Review means checking claims against sources, removing invented specifics, fixing tone that sounds like marketing filler, and refusing topics outside our operating experience. AI disclosure is not a gimmick and not a liability dodge; it is a plain account of how the words get made. If a page cannot survive that human pass, it does not go up.
Frequently asked questions
How do you verify prices and competitor claims?
Prices come from published rate pages with the pull date noted. Competitor facts are checked against their own sites or official docs, or marked unverified. We do not treat undated listicles as sources.
What is your correction policy?
We update the page and add a dated note when substance changes. Silent rewrites of factual claims are not acceptable. Report errors via ops@smsroute.cc or a GitHub issue on SMSRoute-cc.
Do you use AI to write these pages?
Drafts are machine-assisted. Every page is human-reviewed by the engineering team before publish, including source checks and removal of anything we cannot stand behind.