Editorial Policy

NCPRN Review publishes reference journalism about names. This page sets out the rules we hold ourselves to.

Scope. We cover acronyms, letter strings, expired and dormant domains, and the verification practices around them. We do not cover general web hosting advice, investment, legal advice or security services.

Independence. NCPRN Review is a new publication. We claim no continuity with any earlier body, brand or service, and we accept no position that would make us a registry or an authority on any name.

Sourcing. Every factual claim should be traceable to a named public source, cited close to the claim. Where a statement rests on our own reasoning rather than a source, it is written as reasoning and marked as such. We do not invent tests, measurements, interviews or documents, and we do not present them as having happened.

Uncertainty. Where evidence is thin or contradictory, the article says so. A plausible expansion of an acronym is described as plausible, never as established. We prefer an admitted gap to a confident guess.

Corrections. Errors are corrected when evidence is supplied. A correction request must identify the article and the passage, and must include supporting evidence. Changes are recorded rather than made silently, and declined requests receive a reason.

Images. All illustrations on this site are AI generated and decorative. They are not photographs of real places, people or records, and they must never be read as evidence for a claim.

Language. Copy is written in English using British spelling, with dashes avoided in favour of commas, colons and full stops. Acronyms are spelled out on first use.

These rules apply to every page, including this one. A policy that is not followed is not a policy, and readers should hold us to it.