Editorial policy

SpeciesWatch explains biodiversity pressure without turning uncertainty into spectacle. Editorial choices are made for public understanding and conservation relevance; data providers and future advertisers do not receive control over conclusions.

We prefer primary scientific datasets, public agencies, recognized conservation assessments and clearly licensed archives. Secondary sources may provide context, but material claims should be traceable to the Studies & References links or the Sources page.

Species profiles are a selected catalogue, not a claim of global completeness. We distinguish observed records from ranges, heat detections from confirmed fire perimeters, published estimates from live censuses, and editorial indices from scientific forecasts.

Articles synthesize evidence in original language and identify important limitations. Automated tools may assist research, organization or drafting, but publication remains subject to human editorial review and source checking. We do not reproduce source articles word for word.

Substantive errors are corrected as soon as they can be verified. Send the page URL, the disputed passage and supporting evidence to contact@specieswatch.io. Changes to dynamic source feeds may appear through the next scheduled synchronization rather than as an editorial correction.

If advertising is introduced, commercial placement will be visually separated from editorial content. Sponsorship, affiliate relationships or material conflicts relevant to a page will be disclosed. Advertising will not determine risk categories, profile selection or the interpretation of evidence.