Last reviewed: 8 August 2026
This policy describes how Thomas Edison Biography researches, writes, reviews and corrects its historical content.
Purpose and editorial approach
Our purpose is to publish accessible, original and evidence-led explanations of Thomas Edison’s life and historical setting. Articles should add interpretation, context or synthesis rather than merely rearranging information already available elsewhere.
We avoid treating Edison as either a solitary genius responsible for every result or a fraud who contributed nothing. The work of laboratory employees, collaborators, financiers, competitors, performers and factory workers is identified where the evidence supports it. Controversial subjects are presented with enough context for readers to understand what is documented, what is disputed and what remains uncertain.
Source standards
We prefer primary records and authoritative institutional collections, including patents, laboratory documentation, contemporary publications, government records, books from established scholarly or museum publishers, and material maintained by libraries, archives, museums, universities and historic sites.
Secondary sources are evaluated for author, publisher, date, evidence and proximity to the subject. A search result, unsourced list, copied quotation page or automatically generated summary is not treated as sufficient evidence for a historical claim.
Substantial articles include Sources and further reading. Important quotations, numbers, dates and claims that are commonly disputed should be traceable to the listed material. Links are provided where a stable public version exists.
Originality and review
Published articles must have their own purpose and structure and must contribute useful explanation. Facts that are public knowledge are expressed in original prose and placed within a distinct analysis. We do not knowingly publish copied, spun or lightly rewritten articles.
Before publication, an article is reviewed for factual accuracy, unsupported claims, internal consistency, duplicated passages, source quality, clarity, image rights, captions, alt text and working links. Titles and introductions should describe the article honestly rather than exaggerate for clicks.
Tools and artificial intelligence
Digital tools may assist with transcription, organisation, spelling, link checking, image preparation or early drafting. They do not replace editorial responsibility. Claims, quotations and references must be checked against the underlying sources, and a human editor is responsible for the final selection, argument and published wording. Material that cannot be adequately verified is removed or clearly qualified.
Images and quotations
Images are selected from public-domain collections, appropriately licensed sources or material used with permission or another valid legal basis. We retain source and rights information and provide attribution or credit where required. Captions should identify the subject and avoid presenting a reconstruction or later photograph as a contemporary event.
Quotations are kept proportionate, attributed to their source and used to explain the history rather than substitute for original writing. If a rights holder identifies a credible problem, the material is reviewed and may be corrected, replaced or removed while the issue is investigated.
Corrections
Readers can report a possible error through the Contact page. Please identify the article, disputed passage and supporting evidence. We assess corrections against the available record. Minor spelling or formatting errors may be fixed without a note; a correction that materially changes the meaning should be acknowledged in the article or its revision history.
Advertising and independence
Advertising does not determine subjects, sources or conclusions. Editorial pages are not written to satisfy an advertiser, and sponsored material, if ever accepted, will be labelled clearly. The site does not accept payment to alter historical conclusions or hide a documented correction.