Editorial Review Process

This page describes the editorial checks intended for RevenueInfoTech's technology-news workflow. It is an editorial review process, not academic peer review or a claim that outside specialists review every story.

1. Automated discovery

RSS and Atom feeds collect candidate headlines, publisher names, source links, dates and short feed excerpts into an unpublished review queue. Collection does not automatically publish these candidates to the homepage.

2. Human review before homepage selection

• Open the original publisher or primary source.
• Check the publication date, headline, names, figures and material claims.
• Check whether the story is still current and relevant.
• Write an original summary and add context; do not copy or lightly rewrite the feed excerpt.
• Keep the source attribution and link visible.
• Preview the item and explicitly publish it through the Newsdesk.

3. Original reporting and testing

If an article describes original tests, interviews, hands-on reviews or benchmarks, the published article should identify the real author or editor, explain the method and conditions, and link to supporting material where possible. RevenueInfoTech does not claim that such work has been performed unless the article documents it.

4. Corrections

Readers can report errors through the Contact page. Material errors should be corrected promptly, with a dated note where appropriate.