Standards
Research Methodology
Every framework on PubliNiche comes from the same six steps, and every claim rests on a dated primary source. Where we could not verify something, we say so.
1. Market and page selection
We cover the United Kingdom, the United States (state by state), Canada (province by province) and Germany, where the rules affecting affiliate publishers can be sourced from regulators, statutes and official guidance. We study page types common to affiliate sites: hubs, reviews, comparisons, bonus and payment pages, disclosures.
2. Template mapping
Each page type is mapped to the job it does for a reader and the evidence it needs. That map is the basis of the frameworks.
3. Evidence review
Claims about search engines rest on the search engine's own documentation. Claims about law and advertising rest on statutes, regulators and self-regulatory bodies such as the ASA. Secondary sources, such as law firm notes, are used only when a primary source is unavailable and are labeled.
4. UX and disclosure analysis
We look at how a page presents evidence, criteria and commercial relationships to a reader, using the disclosure standards of each market.
5. SEO interpretation
We read Google's policies on reviews, spam and links as written, quote them, and avoid claims about ranking effects that Google does not make.
6. Editorial recommendations
Guides end in practical steps, questions and a dated source list.
Examples and tools
Examples use invented paths such as /reviews/example-casino-a/ and are labeled. The audit workbench shows synthetic rows. No tool fetches or crawls a website.
Limits
- We do not publish search volumes, traffic estimates or rankings. Keyword planning tables mark volume as NOT MEASURED.
- Rules change. Each source carries the date shown when we checked it; the header shows the last full source check.
- Nothing here is legal advice.