Updated October 2026. This page explains Eduloaded’s approach to publishing useful education information and responding to corrections.
Purpose and sources
Reviewed guides should help readers complete a real task or make a better-informed enquiry. Provider announcements, official portals, institutions and relevant public authorities are the preferred sources for requirements, dates and application routes. A third-party repost is not a substitute for checking a material claim against an appropriate source.
Original value
A guide should explain a process, compare relevant considerations or offer a practical checklist or example. Repeating an announcement under another title or changing synonyms does not establish useful original analysis. Illustrative examples should be labelled clearly and should not be presented as verified student outcomes.
Dates and uncertainty
An old deadline should not be carried into a new year without verification. Where a current date or important term cannot be established, the article should say so or the listing should remain out of publication pending review. A positive application status should not be described as a guaranteed award or job.
Corrections and archive work
The site has a substantial legacy archive. Content and technical screening help prioritise its review but do not constitute an individual fact-check of every historical page. Confirmed problems may be corrected, consolidated into a more useful resource, or held in draft until a reliable source is available.
Report a concern through the contact page with the article URL and supporting official information. Corrections should address the underlying claim, including the headline or summary when necessary.
Independence and decisions
Eduloaded is an information publisher. Providers decide admission, funding and recruitment outcomes. Readers should follow the provider’s official instructions and written decisions for their own applications.
See About Eduloaded and our privacy policy for further information.