How UBWHY works
Sources and corrections
This page explains what UBWHY counts as evidence, how each source is classified, and what happens when something published here turns out to be wrong. It matters because the strength of a conclusion depends entirely on what is behind it. Expect the classification rules in full, including where they can fail.
- Last reviewed
The evidence hierarchy
Every source cited in an analysis is recorded with its publisher, its URL, the date it was accessed, and a note describing what it actually supports. Each is classified as one of five types:
- Primary
- Independent original evidence, datasets, records or observations that are not supplied by the company being analysed.
- Regulatory
- Material issued by an official regulator, court, authority or comparable public body.
- Company
- Claims, documents, fee schedules, product terms, calculations, reports or statements published or supplied by the company being analysed — including its parent and subsidiaries, its employees and representatives, its ambassadors, and its affiliates and commercial partners.
- Research
- Independent research with an identifiable methodology or evidence base.
- Secondary
- Reporting or commentary that relies on other underlying sources.
On an analysis page these are grouped into independent evidence, company-provided material and secondary reporting, with each group labelled so a reader can see at a glance what kind of support a claim has.
First-party is not independent
In ordinary research usage, a company's own document is a "primary source" because it is the original. UBWHY does not use the word that way.
If the company being analysed published or supplied the material, it is classified as company evidence — even when it is the original document, and even when nothing more authoritative exists. A fee schedule published by the company is company evidence. So is a company blog post, a calculator hosted on its own site, a statement from an employee, and material from an ambassador or commercial partner.
What a company source can support
Company evidence is not worthless. It is the best available record of what the company says, and that is often exactly what an analysis needs to establish.
What it cannot do is verify the claim it contains. A company source supports "the company states that the fee is X". It does not support "the fee is X", it does not establish that the list of fees is complete, and it does not guarantee the terms will not change. Where a claim matters and only company material supports it, the analysis says so rather than implying independent confirmation.
Classification is an editorial judgement, and it is the point at which this can go wrong. The publishing system checks that a valid type was chosen; it cannot check that the right one was. A company document mistakenly classified as primary would appear under independent evidence and would be wrong on the page. Classification is therefore verified by author and reviewer before publication, not treated as a formality.
UBWHY calculations and judgment
Figures UBWHY works out, and the conclusions drawn from them, are UBWHY's own and are labelled that way. They are never attributed to a source, and they are never presented as findings from the material cited.
Calculations show their formula, inputs, units and the source of each input, so a reader who disputes an input can see what it changes.
Traceability and archiving
Every source record carries the date it was accessed, and an archived copy where one is available, so a claim stays traceable even if the original page is edited or moved.
UBWHY cannot guarantee that third-party sources remain available, unchanged or reachable. Links break, documents are revised and pages are withdrawn. The access date records what was there when the claim was made.
Corrections
When something published here is wrong, it is corrected on the record. Each correction is stored with its date, what changed, why it changed, and a source supporting the correction.
- Material
- A correction that changes part of the substance — a figure, a risk, a conclusion. It appears as a visible notice on the analysis itself as well as in the correction history.
- Minor
- A copy edit that changes no substance. It is recorded in the correction history without a prominent notice.
Substantive conclusions are not rewritten quietly. If a verdict changes, the change and its reason are recorded rather than replacing the old text as though it had never been there.
Archived analyses
When a product is discontinued, or an analysis can no longer be relied on, the page is archived rather than deleted. An archived analysis keeps a visible warning explaining why and when, drops its active recommendations and affiliate links, and links to a current analysis where one exists.
Corrections and source submissions are welcome, and a demonstrated error will be corrected.