How Mend Pixels decides what to publish.
Search demand can identify a useful question. It cannot supply the facts, experience, or verdict used to answer it.
Topic selection
We prioritize a clear image task, evidence we can obtain lawfully, fit with an existing topic cluster, and independent value beyond an app directory or rewritten source. We do not create thin pages for minor keyword, file-size, format, or platform variations when one stronger canonical page can answer them.
Source hierarchy
Firsthand retained tests are used for experience and output claims. Official stores, developer documentation, specifications, and policies support attributed product facts. Search snippets and third-party summaries are leads only. Conflicting primary sources are disclosed or the claim is omitted.
Reviews, comparisons, and rankings
Verified listings remain neutral and visibly state when hands-on testing is pending. Reviews require reproducible T1 evidence. Comparisons use the same relevant source files and criteria for every product. Alternatives and rankings require comparable testing for every ranked option, transparent inclusion rules, and current availability and price checks.
AI-assisted work
AI can assist with organizing research, checking consistency, drafting, editing, and technical QA. It may not invent use, results, screenshots, timings, prices, sources, quotations, or user sentiment. We do not add artificial errors or quirks to make generated prose appear human.
Authorship and updates
Guides identify the responsible Mend Pixels editorial role and show a real publication or review date. App listings show when their official-store facts were checked; hands-on reviews will add the responsible reviewer and test date before receiving that label. A visible date changes only after a substantive fact check, test, or material rewrite.
Commercial independence
Advertising, affiliate availability, commission rates, gifts, or sponsored access do not determine test criteria or conclusions. Paid relationships are disclosed near relevant content, paid links are marked appropriately, and sponsors do not receive an undisclosed right to approve editorial findings.
Questions and challenges
Send source concerns, conflicts of interest, or evidence-backed challenges to [email protected]. Factual errors follow the Corrections Policy.