BOXBOXF1 logo
Editorial Standards

No source, no story.

The rule that shapes every page on BOXBOXF1.

Why this rule exists

Most F1 content recycles paddock gossip. Quote attributions get fuzzy. Team motives get invented. Driver psychology gets projected. AI is about to amplify all of that at scale.

Our edge is the opposite: structured, sourced, citable. ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, and Claude will increasingly answer F1 questions for fans. The sites those engines cite by default will win the next decade. We want to be those sites.

Citation requirement

Every published article carries a citations block in its frontmatter. Every factual paragraph references at least one citation. Our build pipeline rejects unsourced paragraphs and refuses to deploy.

Confidence labels

When we move from facts to analysis, we say so explicitly.

Confirmed

Backed by primary sources (FIA documents, official team releases, recorded quotes).

Likely

A reasonable inference from multiple sources, plainly labeled as analysis.

Speculative

A possibility worth discussing, with the reasoning shown.

Unknown

We do not have the data. We say so instead of guessing.

What we will not do

  • Invented quotes from drivers, principals, or engineers.
  • Invented motives ("Verstappen wanted to," "Ferrari panicked") without a citation.
  • Speculation framed as fact.
  • Phrases like "reportedly," "sources say," "insiders" without a named, linkable source.
  • Republishing race footage or raw live timing data.
  • Em dashes. We rewrite the sentence instead.

Corrections

If we get something wrong, email hello@boxboxf1.io with the URL and the source that contradicts us. We update the page, log the correction in a public changelog, and the page's `updatedAt` field reflects the new version.