Anyone can put a headline on a web page. What separates reporting from noise is the method behind it, so this is a plain account of the TablesProWorld Com editorial standards — where the facts come from, who checks them, and what happens when we get something wrong.
Our editorial standards in short
- We trace every number to a primary source and link it, so you can check it in one click
- We never run a story on a single anonymous claim
- Every article carries a named editor and a visible date
- We publish corrections on the article, dated, and never delete them quietly
- Nobody pays for an article, and no advertiser has ever influenced one
Where the facts come from
Reporting starts with the original document, not with somebody else’s write-up of it. In practice that means agency releases and official statistics: the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for a health story, Freddie Mac’s weekly survey for mortgage rates, the Bureau of Labor Statistics for jobs, the congressional record for a vote.
When a figure comes from reporting rather than a document, we name the outlet that broke it in the sentence itself. We do not launder another newsroom’s scoop into an unattributed fact.
How we check a story before it goes out
- Trace the number. Every statistic in a draft has to appear in the source document, not in a summary of it.
- Date it. A rate or a case count is meaningless without the period it covers, so the survey week or reporting window goes in the sentence.
- Check the conflict. Where two credible sources disagree, we say so or leave the figure out rather than pick the more dramatic one.
- Link it. The source goes in the article, not in a footnote nobody reads.
- Read it cold. Finally we read the draft again, hunting for claims that have drifted beyond what the source actually supports.
In practice that fifth step catches the most. It is easy to write a sentence slightly stronger than the evidence allows, and easy to miss on the first pass.
What we rule out
We publish no AI-generated articles as reporting. Nor do we scrape or rewrite other sites’ work. Invented quotes, stock photos passed off as news images and headlines the article itself does not support are all out. If we cannot source a claim, it does not run — even when it is the interesting part of the story.
We also do not backdate. If the site goes quiet for a week, the next article carries the day it was actually written. You can see that in the business and health news archives.
Corrections and how to ask for one
Mistakes get fixed in public. We correct the article, add a dated note at the point of the change, and describe the original error rather than hiding it. Above all, we remove nothing from the archive to make the record look cleaner.
If you have spotted something, email admin@tablesproworldcom.net with the link and the problem, or use the contact page. We welcome corrections from readers, and we never treat them as complaints.
Questions about how we work
Who applies these standards?
The editor, Aero Kingsley, who also writes the articles. That is a genuine limitation of a one-person publication and we would rather name it than dress it up — the ownership picture is set out in who runs TablesProWorld Com.
Do you use AI to write articles?
Not for reporting. Research tools may help us find a document; the sourcing, the judgement and the words are the editor’s, and the byline is a real person’s.
How can I tell an article followed this process?
Look for three things: a named editor at the top, a date that is not vague, and outbound links on the numbers. If any of those is missing from one of our articles, tell us. The wider picture is in what TablesProWorld Com is and in our own review of the site.
Leave a Reply