Editorial guidelines.
How Gangly content is researched, written, fact-checked, and maintained. We publish this so you know what you're reading — and how we decide what goes live.
How we research
Gangly currently uses a page-level evidence gate for articles that remain searchable. Sources are selected for the claim being made, and may include:
- Primary or official sources, such as standards, regulator guidance, peer-reviewed research and current vendor documentation.
- Calculated examples with visible inputs and formulas. These are illustrations, not customer outcomes or universal benchmarks.
- Editorial methods, such as a scorecard or acceptance threshold, clearly identified as a proposed decision framework.
Official vendor documentation establishes what a vendor publishes, not independent performance. A page must say when Gangly did not run a hands-on test. Pages without an exact research ledger, or with unresolved evidence, are kept out of the searchable index while they are reviewed.
See the current evidence-cleared collection in Gangly Research.
How we write
Each article displays its assigned author or editorial byline. A byline identifies responsibility for the published page; it is not a substitute for evidence or proof of first-hand testing.
Our editorial standard avoids:
- Unsubstantiated claims without sources
- Marketing fluff or buzzwords
- Comparisons that misrepresent competitors
- Generic advice that doesn't apply to B2B sales
Fact-checking process
Before a reviewed article is eligible for indexing:
- The route must have a parseable, page-level research ledger.
- The ledger must contain no unresolved claim or unresolved source item.
- Sources must be linked near the claims they support, with vendor claims labeled as such.
- Calculations must expose their assumptions; legal, security and financial decisions must be escalated to qualified owners.
- The built page must pass canonical, sitemap, internal-link, metadata and structured-data checks.
If a claim cannot be supported, it is removed, bounded as opinion, or the page remains noindex until the evidence gap is resolved.
Correction policy
When a material error is confirmed, we correct the page and re-run the evidence and build checks. Depending on impact, the page may be temporarily removed from the index while the correction is reviewed. We aim to:
- Preserve a clear source and calculation trail.
- Update the visible modified date for substantive revisions.
- Avoid silently changing a conclusion without updating its supporting evidence.
To report an error, email hello@getgangly.com.
Content update schedule
There is no promise that every vendor feature, price or regulation is current merely because a page remains online. Time-sensitive pages state a verification date or require the reader to confirm current plans, entitlements and rules.
Substantive article revisions should update the visible modified date and their evidence ledger. Automated build checks do not replace a human review of meaning.
Funding and disclosure
Gangly publishes content on a website that also markets Gangly, so readers should treat product comparisons involving Gangly as first-party commercial content. Those pages must disclose publisher bias and separate repository-backed Gangly facts from independent evidence.
The reviewed buyer guides state their research method and limitations. Any sponsorship, affiliate relationship or paid placement would require a visible disclosure on the affected page.
Authors and editorial responsibility
Siddharth Gangal is identified as Gangly's founder. Pages attributed to the Gangly Research Team are maintained under the evidence-review process described above.
Named credentials, hands-on tests and independent reviews are stated only when the page can support them. Readers can report an attribution or evidence concern through the correction contact above.