Editorial standards

Technical guidance built on traceable evidence

We apply the same discipline to published guidance that archaeology requires in the field: clear ownership, current primary sources, careful interpretation and visible corrections.

Publication rules

How content earns its place on this site

Authorship
A named person is shown as author only when they wrote or substantially rewrote the page. Otherwise Cambridge Development Archaeology remains the stated organisational author.
Technical review
A named technical reviewer and review date are shown only after that review has actually taken place. We do not add review labels solely to create a search signal.
Sources
Planning, regulatory and technical claims should be checked against current primary sources, prioritising government, local-authority and recognised professional guidance.
Indicative tools
Calculators and condition explanations are orientation tools. They are not quotations, Written Schemes of Investigation, legal advice or decisions by a planning authority.
Corrections
Material errors are corrected when identified. Where a change affects the substance of guidance, the review date and visible wording should be updated together.

Evidence discipline

Clear attribution protects useful information

Practitioner experience, company commissions and published technical guidance are attributed separately so readers can understand who did the work and in what capacity.

Qualifications, memberships, project names, photographs and client details are checked before publication and handled with the permissions appropriate to commercial archaeological work.

Photographs are treated as records, not decoration. Captions must not invent a site, date, client, discovery or project role, and images with unresolved consent, confidentiality, safety or ethical issues are withheld.

Corrections

Tell us if something needs review

If you believe a factual or technical statement is wrong, submit the page address and supporting source through the project-review form. Choose ‘Other’ for the development type and write ‘Content correction’ at the start of the final notes field.

Project review

Need advice on a live scheme?

Published guidance cannot replace a review of the actual condition, brief, site and programme.