The EBW editorial policy sets standards for topic selection, evidence, explanations and corrections. It describes the working standard; each article should identify the verification actually performed.
Audience and scope
European employment, salaries, taxes, visas and relocation are connected but require different evidence. English articles address Nigerian citizens resident in Nigeria. A procedure needs nationality, residence, legal basis and relevant period specified.
An information article helps prepare a decision but cannot determine an individual’s entitlement to status, employment or tax relief. Readable wording must not simplify a rule in a way that changes its meaning.
How topics are selected
Topics arise from recurring reader questions, rule changes, new statistics, material labour-market conditions and practical relocation difficulties. Priority depends on the consequences of an error and the usefulness of an explanation.
Search terms help identify readers’ wording and intent. Search volume cannot establish a claim’s accuracy or justify an outcome promise. Related terms can share an article when they answer one question; separate procedures should not be merged merely to increase length.
Preparing and structuring an article
Work starts with the main question and the topic’s boundaries. Applicable sources are collected, conditions and periods compared, the article structured and conclusions checked. Tables support comparable data, examples explain a method and illustrations add meaning.
Facts, calculation assumptions, analysis and opinions need separate identification. A calculation states its base and period; exceptions must not follow an unconditional promise as an afterthought. Prepublication checks cover headings, metadata, links and whether images support the text.
Sources and evidence of expertise
Operative legislation and the responsible authority take priority for requirements. Statistics need the measure’s definition and period. International databases and professional studies require methodological assessment; a company’s claims remain claims until independently supported.
Author identity, professional qualifications, first-hand experience and expert involvement require an evidential basis. Editing is not a legal consultation. Summarised reviews must not be presented as an original investigation or verified client outcomes.
Independence and commercial relationships
A company may appear as the subject of an overview, the source of its own claim or a commercial participant. These roles must be distinguished. Payment does not establish service quality, and a partnership cannot change government requirements.
A material commercial relationship needs clear disclosure under the labelling standard. Factual accuracy is assessed separately: an advertiser cannot make an incorrect statement an acceptable editorial conclusion.
Updates and editorial accountability
Changes to visas, migration rules, taxes and remuneration can require revisions to related sections, tables and examples. A checking date does not imply continuing accuracy afterwards. A discrepancy needs assessment against evidence and its effect on the conclusion.
A reader’s or company’s report requires assessment; it does not automatically justify removing criticism. Confirmed errors should be corrected, and a material change of meaning should be clear to readers. Unresolved questions remain explicit until evidence is available.
Further reading: Verification and updates, Commercial disclosure.
The About EBW page explains the project’s subjects and purpose; editorial standards should be read alongside each article’s specific limitations.
The author-profile draft sets out verification of identity, experience and contribution. Until confirmed, the profile is not evidence of expertise.