Editorial Standards

We want you to read IceWarm and know exactly where the information came from — whether it’s a heat pump we monitored through a winter, a rebate amount we pulled straight from a government source this week, or a spec sheet we took directly from the manufacturer.

Product write-ups

Every product write-up is tagged as one of two things:

Tested. We (or a named contributor) have actually installed, run or monitored the product in a real home. The write-up names the reviewer and describes the conditions — climate, install context, how long it ran, and any faults we ran into.
Research-based. We’ve analysed published specifications, manufacturer data and independent test results, but we have not had the product installed ourselves. We say this clearly at the top of the page.

Ratings are on a 5-point scale weighted across performance/efficiency, build quality, install complexity, reliability and value. The scale is consistent across categories — a 4.5/5 heat pump and a 4.5/5 battery have cleared the same bar for their price and category.

Buyer’s guides

Our buying guides only recommend products that at least one of our reviewers has tested or researched in depth, and we explain who each pick is for and where it compromises. Prices, availability and rebate amounts change constantly — we link straight to the retailer or the official rebate source so you always see the current figure.

Rebates — verified against source

Every rebate/incentive page carries a “last verified” date and a direct link to the government, utility or program source we checked it against. We re-check rebate details on a rolling basis and flag anything that hasn’t been re-verified recently, rather than let a stale dollar figure sit unlabelled. We never invent a specific rebate amount, eligibility rule or expiry date — if we’re not sure, we say so and point you to the primary source.

Images — manufacturer first

Product photography on IceWarm is, wherever possible, the official image of the exact model and variant, sourced from the manufacturer’s own website or press materials and used editorially alongside our write-up. We verify that the image matches the specific product we’re writing about — a near-identical predecessor or sibling model is not good enough. We don’t use AI-generated product images and we don’t restage other publications’ photos. Where a manufacturer image isn’t available, any illustrative imagery is clearly that, and is properly licensed and credited.

Use of AI

We use AI tools to help draft, summarise and edit — much as most publications now use grammar and research tools. Every piece is reviewed by a human editor before publication, and any factual claim about a product or rebate program is verified against a primary source (usually the manufacturer’s specifications or the official government/utility program page). We do not publish AI-written content without human editing, and we never let an AI draft invent a specific performance number or rebate amount that wasn’t supplied in the source data.

Corrections

If you spot a factual error — a wrong spec, an outdated rebate amount, a discontinued product, anything — let us know via our contact form. We correct quickly, and for material changes we add a dated correction note at the bottom of the affected page.