SaveWise Editorial Policy
These rules define SaveWise’s publication and review workflow.
What readers should be able to verify
A financial explanation should let you check the source, the date, the assumptions and the calculation. SaveWise’s editorial policy is to distinguish official provider terms, regulator information, illustrative arithmetic and practical editorial suggestions. An unsourced claim should not be presented as a confirmed fact. If a term has not been checked, the page should say so rather than supply a plausible value.
Sources, figures and worked examples
Provider prices and eligibility rules should be checked against the provider’s current official documentation. Regulatory statements should link to the relevant regulator or legislation. An affiliate campaign brief describes the campaign and is not a personalised credit quotation. Hypothetical amounts must be labelled as examples, with the formula or steps shown. We do not treat a calculator result as a binding offer.
Authorship and expert review are separate
An author credit identifies the person who actually wrote the publication. A review credit identifies a verified person who checked a particular version for accuracy and completeness. The review record should contain the reviewer, the date, the scope, the version and an internal evidence reference. Material changes require a new review before the reviewed status is restored. An editorial persona does not count as a verified person.
Editorial personas and portraits
The central profile must disclose whether it represents an editorial persona or a verified real person. A portrait does not by itself establish a name, identity or qualification. Credentials must be supported by evidence before they are claimed publicly. An editorial persona must not be used to imply an expert endorsement of a loan or publication.
Commercial links and provider comparisons
SaveWise includes links to loan providers and comparison services. A link should make its destination clear. Where a partnership can generate compensation, the commercial relationship should be disclosed next to the relevant comparison or call to action. Compensation is not evidence that a product is cheaper, suitable or likely to be approved. Click popularity is not a price or quality ranking.
Updates and corrections
An article’s Updated date comes from its content record and is separate from any review date. It does not by itself mean that every external provider term was checked on that date. To report a problem, identify the page URL, the exact statement, the source supporting the correction and the date of that source. The editor should check the evidence before changing the statement and record the correction where it affects the reader’s decision.
Limits of educational content
Guides explain questions to ask and calculations to check. They do not certify a provider, decide affordability, guarantee approval or replace your own agreement. Read the provider’s actual quotation and repayment schedule. An article should describe alternatives where useful without implying that taking another loan resolves a household shortfall.
Questions & answers
No. Only a documented review of the current version by a verified real person supports a Reviewed by credit.
Read the status and biography on its linked central profile. A subject-area label alone is not proof of a qualification or licence.
It is the saved article modification date. It is not the expert review date or a guarantee that all linked terms were rechecked.
No. A campaign brief is distinct from a personalised quotation issued by the provider.
Only if the page identifies it as a current sourced rate. A labelled hypothetical figure is only an arithmetic assumption.
Provide the page address, exact claim and a dated primary source through the site’s published contact route. Do not send bank statements or ID documents.
No. A commercial relationship and a product’s suitability are separate questions. The lender’s quotation and your circumstances still need checking.
The implementation checks the reviewed title, text and language. A changed version loses the recorded review status until an editor records a new completed review.