Useful guidance should show where the facts came from.

This policy explains how DripTell prepares product documentation and educational articles. It also makes the commercial context clear: DripTell publishes this website and builds the product described here.

Useful guidance should show where the facts came from.

Product claims start with the working product.

Feature, workflow and API descriptions are checked against the DripTell product, the live public API specification or maintained internal product documentation before publication.

The public developer guide is reviewed against the live API contract before release.

Platform and policy claims prefer primary sources.

Articles about WhatsApp, Meta policies, security frameworks or other third-party systems link to the platform owner, standards body or regulator when that source is available.

Authorship describes who is accountable.

A named specialist is marked as a Person only when a real individual is attached to the article. DripTell Team and DripTell Editorial are represented as the publishing organization.

A review date should mean a material check.

The last-reviewed date is updated when the product behavior, external policy, source set or substantive guidance is checked. A formatting-only change should not be presented as a fresh review.

Automation may assist drafting, not evidence.

Writing tools can support research organization and drafting. They are not treated as a source. Published factual claims must be supported by product evidence, a primary reference or clearly identified practical judgment.

Corrections remain visible and actionable.

Readers can report an outdated product detail, broken source or factual error to [email protected]. Material corrections are reviewed and the article review date is updated when appropriate.

Found something that needs another look?

Send the page URL, the specific statement and the source or product behavior that conflicts with it.