Methodology

This page explains how articles on Rub-campusmap-praxis are researched, tested, and written. The aim is to make the process visible so readers can judge the conclusions for themselves.

How topics are chosen

Topics come from three places: questions readers email in, gaps the editor notices in existing online coverage of aquarium fish care, and recurring problems encountered in the editor's own practice. Each candidate topic gets a short scoping note before any writing begins — what the article will and will not cover, what the reader should be able to do after reading it, and which sources will inform it.

Research

Primary sources come first: official documentation, manufacturer specifications, peer-reviewed studies where applicable, and direct testing. Secondary sources (other writers, forum discussions, expert interviews) are used to triangulate and to surface angles the editor might have missed. Every claim that is not first-hand experience is traceable to a source the editor has actually read.

Testing

Where a piece involves something that can be tested — a technique, a tool, a routine — Sam Stone runs it personally before writing about it. Tests are repeated enough times to separate signal from noise; one-off impressions are not presented as findings. When a result is uncertain, the article says so.

Writing and editing

First drafts are written quickly, then put aside for at least a day before editing. The edit pass focuses on cutting filler, checking facts again, and making sure the structure serves the reader. Every article gets a final read aloud before publication — it catches problems silent reading misses.

Updates

Published articles are reviewed periodically. If something has changed materially since publication, the article is updated and a brief note is added describing what was changed and when.