Official sites, documentation, help centers, policy pages, and established reporting.
Source-grounded, reader-first, and careful about what gets published.
Every page on Armstrong Journal should feel readable, specific, and traceable back to public materials. The publication is intentionally selective about quality control.
No deposit advice, no guaranteed earnings language, no invented testing.
Clarify or remove weak claims when better sourcing is unavailable.
Source Standards
Articles should be grounded in official product pages, pricing pages, legal pages, documentation, help centers, and when needed, reputable third-party reporting. If a detail cannot be verified from public materials, the article should say that directly.
Review Standards
Review-format pieces are not endorsements. They are meant to describe features, support visibility, pricing clarity, transparency, and the trust signals a reader should inspect before committing to a service.
Updates and Corrections
When a company changes its public pages or a statement becomes outdated, the preferred fix is an update with cleaner wording and fresher sourcing. If a claim becomes too weak to support, it should be removed.