Editorial method

Events Review separates sourced reporting, analysis and assessments so readers can see what is known, what is claimed and what remains uncertain. The evidence behind a piece matters more than its label.

Sources and attribution

We use original announcements, venue and agency information, industry bodies and other identifiable sources. A release is evidence of what its issuer says, not independent confirmation of every claim. Material assertions should be attributable; where evidence conflicts or is incomplete, the limitation should be clear. Dates and figures must refer to the relevant event or period.

Visits, interviews and desk research

A desk-based assessment draws on published information. It does not imply a venue visit, event attendance or a conversation that did not happen. A visit or interview must be identified when it is the basis of coverage. Assessments should explain what was examined, the evidence date and what could not be checked. Accessibility or capacity claims should not be turned into blanket guarantees.

Analysis and opinion

Analysis explains consequences and trade-offs for organisers. Judgement should be distinguishable from reported fact. Directory inclusion and claimed status are not editorial approval, accreditation or a recommendation to enter a contract. Readers should check current arrangements with the relevant venue, agency or organiser.

Sponsorship and ownership

Paid placements and sponsored material must be identified. Paying for a listing or feature does not buy a favourable verdict or inclusion in an independent ranking. Relevant commercial or common-ownership relationships should be disclosed in the coverage itself. Our publisher belongs to the same group of brands as Stand Central; that connection is relevant when it is discussed.

Corrections

For an editorial correction, send the page URL, the disputed statement and supporting evidence. For listing facts or removal requests, use Corrections. Neither route requires payment. A material correction should explain what changed; a revised page should not silently imply that an earlier assessment used evidence it did not have.