Three kinds of claim
Claims about this site's own games - a parry window is 180 milliseconds, a heavy attack recovers in 340, a wave bonus is 250 times the wave number. These make up the large majority of the specific statements on this site.
Claims about game design in general - that telegraphs convert reaction problems into recognition problems, that a difficulty curve should flatten. These are reasoned positions rather than measurements, and they are written as such.
Claims about the world - typical human reaction times, the prevalence of colour vision deficiency. These are the smallest category and the ones handled most carefully.
How game claims are verified
By reading the code. Every timing, damage value, scoring multiplier and difficulty endpoint quoted in a guide is taken from the source file that implements it, not estimated from play.
The site's build process also validates structural claims automatically. Every game listed must have a playable module behind it or the build fails. Every cross-link between a game and a guide must resolve. Every declared HUD slot must exist. No page may carry a date in the future.
In addition, every game is booted in a headless browser and driven with simulated input before release, which verifies that it starts, runs, responds, scores and reaches an ending without error. A game that fails that check does not ship.
How general design claims are handled
They are presented as reasoning rather than as fact, with the argument included so it can be disagreed with. Where a guide says a design decision is correct, it explains what breaks without it.
Where a claim is a matter of judgement - which game is best to start with, whether a mechanic is well designed - it is labelled as editorial opinion rather than presented as a finding.
How claims about the world are handled
Sparingly, and as ranges rather than precise figures. Where the guides mention typical adult reaction times, they give a range and describe it as typical rather than as a standard.
We do not cite studies we have not read, and we do not attribute figures to named research unless the source is genuinely known. Where a general figure is offered as context, it is framed as context.
If a claim of this kind cannot be stated confidently, it is left out. A guide is better without a supporting statistic than with an invented one.
When a game changes
Retuning a game can make a quoted figure wrong. When a change affects a number that appears in a guide, the guide is updated in the same change and its updated date moves.
This is the most likely source of inaccuracy on the site, and it is the reason the guides quote figures with their source game named - so a reader can check.
Reporting an error
The contact page has a 'Guide correction' subject. Reports of factual errors are prioritised, corrected promptly, and the affected page's updated date is changed.
Substantive corrections are noted in the page rather than made silently, so a reader who saw the earlier version knows what changed.