Research Methodology
How Phone Gadgets distinguishes documented facts, examples and testing.
Last revised: October 8, 2026.
Initial reference guides
The first guides are desk research prepared with AI assistance. Their source lists identify the technical documentation used and when it was accessed. This is not a claim of independent expert review or product testing.
Evidence types
| Type | How it is presented |
|---|---|
| Documented fact | Linked to the relevant primary source |
| Worked calculation | Inputs and units stated; labeled illustrative |
| Purchasing checklist | Proposed workflow, not a completed inspection |
| Manufacturer claim | Attributed to the manufacturer |
| Hands-on result | Only published with actual equipment and a documented method |
See the EPR guide’s component-matching example: documented profiles link to primary sources; the example setup is explicitly hypothetical, not a test result.
Future tests
A charging test must identify the phone, software, adapter, port, cable, starting charge and conditions. An inspection report must distinguish tested units from untested stock and explain the sampling method. We have not performed those tests for the initial guides.
Review schedule
Technical articles have an internal review-due date. That date is a reminder to recheck sources, not evidence that a review has already happened. Accessing a source does not justify adding a named reviewer who did not participate.
Corrections
The corrections process explains what to include: page URL, disputed passage and supporting source. The contact page currently provides no working submission channel. Substantive corrections should be explained in the article, not hidden behind a fresh date.