Numerical check
Units are checked for mg, µg and reference percentages. The serving basis is stated near the table. Decimal formatting is kept consistent. A transcription error is treated as a material editorial issue.
Editorial standards
Method, visible.
Drolvena explains how its South African nutritional information is gathered, checked, dated and presented.
01 // Scope and purpose
This methodology applies to editorial pages published by Drolvena on drolvena.shop. It covers product dossiers, ingredient notes, food context, tables, references and correction handling. It does not describe personal assessment or individual use. The purpose is to show readers how a general information page is assembled.
WES Holding ApS operates the publishing desk from C/O Henrik Gavnbo Ekman, Islands Brygge 23, 5. tv, 2300 København S, Denmark. South African English is used for the main text. Dates are written plainly so readers can see when a page was prepared. A page may be updated when a specification, source or regulatory reference changes.
“A useful editorial record tells the reader what is known, what is listed, and where the boundary of interpretation begins.”
02 // The review sequence
- Define the subject and identify the intended general reader.
- Gather the product specification, serving information and ingredient forms.
- Compare units, abbreviations and reference values for internal consistency.
- Check public regulatory language and preserve its narrow meaning.
- Read the completed page for unsupported implications and unclear transitions.
- Record the review date and retain a short source note.
This sequence is deliberately ordinary. It avoids treating a polished page as a substitute for source work. Each stage creates an opportunity to correct a number, clarify a word or remove an unnecessary inference. The final copy should be readable without hiding its limits.
03 // Delivery reference
The following table is included as a reference for site readers who encounter delivery language in archived editorial material. It is not an order interface. Times are estimates and public holidays may affect them.
| Region | Est. Delivery | Cost |
|---|---|---|
| Gauteng (Johannesburg, Pretoria) | 1–3 business days | Free (COD) |
| Western Cape (Cape Town) | 2–4 business days | Free (COD) |
| KwaZulu-Natal (Durban) | 2–4 business days | Free (COD) |
| Eastern Cape & Free State | 3–5 business days | Free (COD) |
| Other provinces | 3–5 business days | Free (COD) |
| Remote or rural areas | 5–8 business days | Free (COD) |
Delivery wording is separated from nutrient wording because logistics and ingredient information answer different questions. A reader should not infer a personal outcome from a delivery estimate. Archived references are retained only to explain the context of a page. Current terms should always be read before relying on any practical detail.
04 // Source hierarchy
Product specifications are the starting point for product pages because they identify the formula being documented. Public regulations and official agency material provide context for terminology. Recognised nutrient references and food composition sources help explain familiar ingredients. None of these sources turns an editorial note into a personal assessment.
- Prefer the current supplied specification for quantities and forms.
- Use official public sources for regulatory descriptions.
- Use established reference material for general food context.
- Mark uncertainty rather than filling a gap with speculation.
When sources differ, the page should state the difference rather than conceal it. A writer may narrow a sentence to match the stronger source. If a detail cannot be checked, it is omitted. This restraint is part of the methodology.
05 // Quality checks
Language check
Ingredient description is kept separate from authorised nutrient wording. Sentences are factual and moderate. Headings describe the section rather than promise an outcome. South African spelling is used throughout.
Context check
Food references are ordinary and recognisable. A balanced daily routine is described broadly. No single ingredient is presented as a complete answer. The reader is directed to the disclaimer where the subject calls for care.
06 // Transparency statement
WES Holding ApS publishes the platform and maintains the page structure. Editorial pages are prepared for general information, not as personal instructions. Product names are retained where a page is documenting a supplied formula. The presence of a product reference does not by itself indicate an endorsement.
Readers can ask about a source, date, correction or wording choice. Send the page address and the specific passage to [email protected]. We aim to acknowledge messages within three business days and complete ordinary source checks within ten business days. Where a conclusion remains uncertain, the response will say so.
Editorial boundary.
Read tables as records of listed information, not as personal targets. Consider the complete page, its date and its disclaimer before drawing conclusions.
07 // Research notes
Research notes are kept in a simple internal format. Each note identifies the page, the date, the source title and the passage used. The writer adds a short explanation of how the source supports the published sentence. This makes later review faster and reduces dependence on memory.
Sources are revisited when an official page changes, when a product specification is replaced or when a reader identifies a credible discrepancy. A dated note does not mean that a source remains current forever. It tells the reader when the editorial desk last looked. Historical wording is not silently presented as current information.
- Page title and web address.
- Date accessed and publication date where available.
- Relevant section, table or paragraph.
- Editorial sentence supported by the reference.
08 // Decisions and exclusions
Every page contains choices about what to leave out. Drolvena excludes dramatic framing, personal anecdotes presented as proof and language that implies certainty beyond the source. It also avoids turning an ingredient's presence into a broad promise. These exclusions protect clarity for readers who may skim.
Where a claim has specific authorised wording, it is quoted narrowly and attributed to the nutrient. Where no authorised wording is available, the ingredient is described without adding an outcome. A product name is not used as evidence. This distinction is repeated through tables and callouts so that the page remains internally consistent.
09 // Corrections route
Corrections can be sent to [email protected] during Mon–Fri 8:00 AM – 5:00 PM CET. The publishing desk records the page, passage, proposed correction and supporting reason. Routine enquiries receive an acknowledgement within three business days. A source review normally receives a substantive response within ten business days.
If a change affects a table, date or legal statement, the page is checked in full rather than patched in isolation. The revision date is then updated. If the desk does not accept a proposed correction, it explains the source basis in the response. Correspondence may be retained as an editorial record.
10 // Revision history
12 June 2026: The methodology framework was first published with source handling and review stages. 18 June 2026: Ingredient and language checks were expanded. 24 June 2026: Delivery reference notes and correction response times were added. 30 June 2026: Research-note fields and exclusion principles were clarified.
Future revisions will be dated in this section. A change may reflect a new source, a changed site structure or a clearer explanation of an existing practice. The revision record is not a claim that every earlier sentence was exhaustive. It is a map of how the publishing method has been maintained.