Every substantive article on Petoniki goes through the same process before it can be published. This page sets out what that process is, who performs it, and how corrections work.
The wider commitments behind it — what we publish, what we refuse, and what we do not claim — are described on the About Us page.
How an article is planned
We begin with the question, not the subject. A page is built around a specific question a reader actually asks, and we write down who is asking it and what they need from the answer.
That decision is what keeps an article on topic rather than letting it expand into an unfocused overview of everything connected to it.
Where our information comes from
We work from primary and authoritative material in preference to other websites. That means peer-reviewed veterinary literature; publications from universities and veterinary schools; national and international veterinary associations; recognised breed and species registries; government animal-health and agriculture bodies; and reputable animal-welfare organisations.
Encyclopaedic or commercial pages may be used as orientation, never as the sole basis for a factual claim.
What we cross-check
Facts a reader could act on are confirmed against more than one independent source: dosages, temperatures, toxic substances, timeframes, danger signs and species-specific risks.
We also check those sources against the species and the region the page is about, because guidance that is correct in one country or for one species may not be correct in another.
Consistency with the rest of the site
New pages are checked against existing Petoniki content so that the same question is not answered two different ways in two different articles.
Where a page contradicts something we have already published, we resolve the conflict rather than leaving both versions live.
Editorial review before publication
A named member of our editorial team reviews accuracy, sourcing, scope, structure, clarity and tone before publication, and either returns the draft or approves it.
The review is an editorial check, not a clinical one. We do not claim that a licensed veterinarian reviews, approves or fact-checks our content, and we name no veterinary reviewer.
Plain language and safety
Every article also gets a plain-language and safety pass. We check that warnings are unmissable, that uncertainty is not presented as certainty, and that no sentence could be read as a diagnosis or as an instruction for treatment.
Health-related pages state plainly what the page is and what it is not, and point readers to professional care. Where an article cannot carry that message clearly, the Medical Disclaimer does instead.
Product recommendations
Where a claim about a product can reasonably be checked — food, feeding, care and health-related products in particular — we obtain and use the product ourselves before recommending it.
We do not claim that every product mentioned on the site has been tested, because that would not be true.
Advertising and editorial independence
Advertisers, sponsors and affiliate partners get no approval rights over editorial content. They do not see an article before publication, they cannot ask for a change, and buying space does not buy a favourable verdict on a product, a brand or a claim.
Where a commercial relationship exists anywhere on the site, it is labelled. The rules are set out in the Advertising Disclosure and the Affiliate Disclosure.
Corrections and updates
We revisit published pages periodically, and whenever new authoritative guidance, a significant research finding, a safety issue or a consistent pattern of reader questions makes a revision necessary. Pages show when they were last updated.
If something we published is wrong, we correct or annotate the page once the point is confirmed, and the change is recorded through our normal revision history. Substantive corrections are made openly rather than quietly.
If you find an error — a factual mistake, an outdated recommendation, a missing safety warning, a broken source, or wording that reads as more certain than the evidence allows — write to [email protected], with the page and, if you can, the source you believe is correct. Reports are read by the editorial team.