Editorial Policy

This page documents exactly how an article gets onto Quvii — what we use as sources, how we draft and fact-check, what passes our quality gate vs. what gets cut, and how we handle mistakes when we make them.

Sourcing

Every factual claim in a Quvii article must trace to one of four source types:

• Manufacturer documentation — official spec sheets, FCC filings, support docs, firmware changelogs, privacy policies. Canonical truth for hardware + policy claims.
• Independent reviewers — RTINGS, Wirecutter, Tom's Guide, The Verge, CNET, Consumer Reports. Cross-referenced against each other when conclusions diverge.
• Verifiable community consensus — r/HomeSecurity, r/homedefense, r/AmazonRing wiki + pinned threads. We cite the thread URL, not individual unverifiable user claims.
• Direct hands-on testing — for cameras we've physically installed and tested. Each test article notes the test duration + conditions so you can calibrate confidence.

What's not a source: manufacturer press releases (we treat these as marketing, not reporting), Amazon product-detail pages (the seller controls the copy), or YouTube reviewers whose sponsorship-disclosure history we can't verify.

How content is produced

Quvii articles are AI-assisted and human-reviewed. We disclose this transparently because Google's own guidance is clear: AI-assisted content is fine when it's useful, accurate, and labeled. Hiding it is the trust-loss risk we explicitly avoid.

1. Our editorial pipeline picks topics from a curated pool of camera-shopper search queries (real questions real buyers type).
2. An outline-generation step uses Google Search grounding to draft section structure — every section must cite ≥1 source URL.
3. A drafting step expands sections to prose with strict noun-binding: every named product, spec, or policy claim must come from a cited source, never invented.
4. A QA step scores the draft on six dimensions including a hard factual-accuracy gate: any unverifiable proper noun or spec auto- rejects the article.
5. A human editor reviews every flagged article before publish. For articles scoring ≥ 7.5/10 with zero fabricated claims, the editorial review is a final spot-check.
6. Only articles passing the 6.0/10 floor publish. Articles scoring 6.0–7.5 publish with an "Editorial note" tier label. Below 6.0, the article is noindex'd and excluded from sitemap.

Tier labels you'll see on articles

• (no label) — qa_score ≥ 7.5. Standard editorial confidence.
• Editorial note — qa_score 6.0–7.5. Published, but we flag the score-band so you can calibrate trust.
• noindex — qa_score < 6.0. Page exists for completeness but not promoted to Google.

Independence + conflicts of interest

Quvii is independent of every camera manufacturer. We:

• Take no payment, equipment, or trips from manufacturers in exchange for coverage.
• Maintain a public log of declined paid-placement offers — available on request at hello@quvii.com.
• Use Amazon Associates affiliate links for competitor cameras with the same commission percentage across products in a category — no incentive to rank Product A over Product B.

Corrections

Found an error? Email corrections@quvii.com with the article URL and what's wrong. We respond within 3 business days. Material corrections get a "Corrected on YYYY-MM-DD" line at the top of the affected article + a changelog note at the bottom.

What we won't do

• Publish a "review" we didn't independently verify.
• Re-order rankings in exchange for commission upgrades.
• Publish vendor press releases as our own reporting.
• Run clickbait headlines. Every title must describe what's in the article.
• Take payment for "sponsored coverage" of any kind.