Sources, verification and corrections

We distinguish first-party casino or platform material, operator-submitted experience, structured datasets and editorial analysis. Important external claims should name or link the underlying source where publication rights and access allow it.

Automated classifications and aggregate counts are treated as hypotheses until checked against representative records. Material findings should test both false positives and omissions and state the date, market and unit being counted.

A commercial relationship must not buy a score, an approved review or a favourable conclusion. Sponsored or commercially supplied material should be labelled clearly and remain subject to factual correction.

Automation may assist collection, classification, drafting and quality checks. It does not remove our responsibility to identify sources, avoid fabricated evidence, disclose meaningful uncertainty and correct errors.

Report a suspected error through the contact page with the affected URL and supporting evidence. We review material challenges, correct confirmed errors and update the page date; significant changes should be described rather than silently obscured.

Platforms, operators, contributors and readers may challenge factual statements. A response is assessed against evidence and the same standards as the original claim; disagreement alone does not require a factual conclusion to change.