Editorial policy

The site covers specific cleaning problems — stains, odours and general wear — on particular surfaces and materials, along with the methods that address them and the mistakes worth avoiding. Where it's relevant, we also look at when a product or machine might genuinely help, and where there's enough to say responsibly, we cover equipment in more detail. Not every topic gets that equipment treatment — only the ones where we have something specific and useful to add.

What we publish can draw on published guidance and technical references, manufacturer documentation, publicly reported owner experiences where relevant, and direct hands-on experience — but only when that experience genuinely exists. Which of these applies to a given article depends on the article; we don't claim that every one draws on all of them. The full evidence system behind these labels, including what each one means and doesn't mean, is set out on How we assess.

• Problem first, product second — we start with what's actually going on before considering whether anything needs buying.
• No single method is treated as safe for every material or cause — where that matters, we say so rather than offering one universal recipe.
• Manufacturer care guidance takes priority where it's relevant, over a generic instruction that might not suit a specific surface.
• Uncertainty and limitations are stated rather than smoothed over, including when we simply don't know something.
• Researched information is kept distinct from hands-on experience, so it's clear which is which.
• We avoid recommending equipment where a simpler approach is genuinely sufficient.

Clean Surface Lab does not currently have any active affiliate links. If affiliate links or other commercial relationships exist in future, they won't determine which evidence a product receives, and a commercial link attached to a product won't, on its own, turn it into a recommendation. What decides whether something is worth writing about is whether it actually fits the problem and the reader's situation — that stays the basis for our editorial decisions regardless of any commercial relationship that may exist around it.

We correct factual errors when we find them, whether we spot them ourselves or a reader points one out. Guides carry a visible "Updated" date that reflects when the content itself last changed. We don't currently work to a fixed review calendar, and we'd rather not promise one we're not yet following — if that changes as the site grows, we'll say so here.

• We won't invent tests or hands-on experience we haven't actually carried out.
• We won't publish ratings or review scores without a real basis behind them.
• We won't present a manufacturer's own claims as if they were independent testing.
• We won't recommend a machine simply because it costs more or pays a higher commission.
• We won't create a page for every possible Stain Finder combination when there isn't a useful, specific guide behind it.

• How we assess — the full evidence system behind every label used across the site.
• Stain Finder — a tool that points to a method for your situation, not a product.
• Equipment — when a machine may or may not be worth considering, and the types available.