Overview
Source hierarchy
Product data and manufacturer instructions come first, then common estimating logic, merchant conventions, and general planning guidance.
Trust center
How BuildCostLab reviews, updates, and corrects content
These standards apply to calculators, guides, location pages, comparisons, and supporting trust pages. The goal is to keep the site useful, practical, and honest about what an estimate can and cannot do.
Overview
Review approach
Pages are checked for formula logic, wording clarity, broken links, and whether the guidance still matches the intended use case.
Overview
Corrections
Users are encouraged to report inaccuracies, outdated assumptions, or unclear explanations using the contact page.
Source hierarchy
Where a page relies on factual inputs, BuildCostLab prioritises manufacturer specifications, product sheets, installation guidance, stated pack sizes, and clearly attributable reference material. General estimating logic and common trade practice are used to make that information more usable for planning.
Calculator outputs vs editorial guidance
Calculators produce estimate outputs from inputs, formulas, and stated assumptions. Editorial pages explain how to use those outputs, what usually changes them, and what people should still verify locally. The two serve different roles and should be read together when the decision carries cost or ordering risk.
How pages are reviewed
Reviews focus on whether the maths still works, whether the copy still reflects the intended use case, whether related links still point to the right next step, and whether the page explains its main assumptions clearly enough for a planning decision.
How updates are handled
Important pages are revisited when formulas change, related content is expanded, internal links need tightening, or a page no longer answers the user question as clearly as it should. The displayed last-checked signal is there to show when the page was most recently reviewed as part of that maintenance process.
How inaccuracies are corrected
When a user reports a potential issue, the page, formula, or wording is reviewed against the relevant assumptions and supporting information. If a correction is needed, the page is updated and the surrounding guidance is checked so the same problem is less likely to recur elsewhere.
Standards for comparisons and FAQs
Comparison pages should compare like with like, show the trade-offs that matter, and avoid presenting a headline rate without context. FAQs should answer genuine user uncertainty, not repeat the headline with different wording.
Related trust pages
Use these pages together when you want to understand how estimates are built, reviewed, and meant to be used.