Mechanisms, not magic. Evidence before certainty.

Editorial Standards · How We Research

Editorial Team

Explained How is currently operated and primarily edited by Duc Nguyen.

Duc is the founder, owner, primary explanatory writer, and editor responsible for the publication’s overall editorial direction.

Explained How does not present itself as having a large editorial department when one does not currently exist.

Our principle is simple:

Editorial roles should reflect the people who actually perform the work.

At this stage, Duc Nguyen is responsible for the core research, writing, editing, fact-checking, corrections, and editorial oversight performed by Explained How unless another contributor or reviewer is specifically identified.

Duc Nguyen

Founder, Owner, Author & Editor

Duc Nguyen is a Vietnamese founder, editor, and explanatory writer who researches and analyzes how things work.

He created Explained How as an independent educational publication focused on one central question:

How does it actually work?

His editorial work covers a broad range of subjects, including:

  • animals and living systems;
  • the human body;
  • physics and space;
  • weather and natural phenomena;
  • machines and engineering;
  • transportation;
  • artificial intelligence;
  • computers and the Internet;
  • everyday objects;
  • infrastructure;
  • economic and social systems.

Although the subject matter varies, the editorial method remains consistent:

Understand the mechanism behind the outcome.

Learn more about Duc:

[Duc Nguyen →](/authors/)

Duc’s Editorial Role

As the primary editor of Explained How, Duc is responsible for maintaining the publication’s editorial standards.

His work may include:

  • choosing topics;
  • defining the central question of an article;
  • identifying the mechanism that needs to be explained;
  • researching authoritative sources;
  • comparing competing explanations;
  • verifying important factual claims;
  • reviewing technical terminology;
  • reconstructing cause-and-effect relationships;
  • identifying assumptions and limitations;
  • organizing the article;
  • editing for accuracy and clarity;
  • reviewing AI-assisted material;
  • correcting published errors;
  • maintaining editorial policies.

At present, these functions are not divided among separate editorial departments.

They are primarily handled by Duc.

Research and Editorial Review

Explained How is a research-based publication.

For most articles, Duc’s role includes both:

Research

and

Editorial review

This may involve examining:

  • government publications;
  • scientific agencies;
  • technical documentation;
  • standards;
  • academic research;
  • peer-reviewed papers;
  • engineering manuals;
  • regulatory information;
  • manufacturer documentation;
  • other authoritative sources.

The research process is explained in more detail here:

[How We Research →](/how-we-research/)

Fact-Checking

Duc also currently performs the publication’s primary fact-checking process.

This includes reviewing claims related to:

  • science;
  • technical mechanisms;
  • numerical information;
  • dates;
  • specifications;
  • changing information;
  • causal relationships.

Explained How does not currently claim to employ a separate full-time fact-checking department.

If a separate fact-checker contributes to an article in the future, that role may be identified where appropriate.

Read:

[Fact-Checking Policy →](/fact-checking-policy/)

Editing

Duc directly edits Explained How content before publication.

Editing may include:

Accuracy

Checking whether the explanation is supported by appropriate evidence.

Mechanism

Checking whether the sequence of cause and effect is represented correctly.

Clarity

Making complex information understandable without changing its meaning.

Structure

Ensuring that the article answers the reader’s actual question rather than simply collecting facts.

Terminology

Checking whether technical terms are used appropriately.

Uncertainty

Ensuring that estimates, disagreement, limitations, or unknowns are not presented as absolute facts.

Consistency

Checking that different sections of the article do not contradict each other.

The Mechanism-First Editorial Approach

Duc oversees Explained How’s Mechanism-First editorial model.

Where useful, explanations are analyzed through:

INPUT → PROCESS → OUTPUT → FEEDBACK → LIMITS

This encourages the editor to ask:

  • What enters the system?
  • What happens inside it?
  • Why does one step cause the next?
  • What result is produced?
  • What controls or modifies the system?
  • Under what conditions does it fail or change?

This method helps keep articles focused on explanation rather than simply definition.

Original Explanation, Not Just Rewriting

Editing at Explained How also involves asking whether an article provides meaningful explanatory value.

Duc looks for:

  • the causal chain;
  • an important missing step;
  • a hidden assumption;
  • a feedback mechanism;
  • a system limitation;
  • a misleading analogy;
  • a distinction commonly overlooked.

The goal is not to manufacture originality by inventing facts.

The goal is to create original synthesis from reliable evidence.

AI-Assisted Editorial Work

Explained How may use AI-assisted tools during parts of the editorial workflow.

Duc may use such tools to help with:

  • research organization;
  • preliminary outlines;
  • terminology discovery;
  • language editing;
  • identifying possible gaps;
  • visual concepts.

However, AI is not presented as an editor or author responsible for the publication.

Duc remains responsible for reviewing the finished content.

AI output is not treated as factual evidence simply because it sounds authoritative.

Read:

[AI Policy →](/ai-policy/)

Corrections

Duc is also currently responsible for reviewing correction requests and overseeing substantive corrections to published Explained How content.

If a meaningful factual error is identified, the objective is to correct the explanation rather than protect the appearance that it was always correct.

Read:

[Corrections Policy →](/corrections-policy/)

Expert Review Is Separate

Duc’s role as editor should not be confused with specialist professional review.

For example, editing a medical explanation does not make Duc a physician.

Editing an engineering explanation does not make him a licensed engineer.

For subjects where specialist professional review is appropriate, Explained How may seek a qualified external reviewer.

If such a review occurs, the reviewer should be identified accurately.

We do not describe an article as:

Medically Reviewed

Expert Reviewed

or:

Reviewed by an Engineer

unless a relevant qualified person actually performed that review.

Read:

[Expert Review Policy →](/expert-review-policy/)

Duc Does Not Claim Expertise in Every Subject

Explained How covers a wide range of topics.

Duc does not claim to personally hold professional expertise across every field the publication explores.

Instead, his editorial role is based on:

  • research;
  • source evaluation;
  • causal analysis;
  • synthesis;
  • explanatory writing;
  • editorial review.

Where professional credentials are necessary, the publication should rely on real qualified specialists rather than creating authority through titles.

No Fictional Editorial Team

Explained How does not create fictional:

  • editors;
  • fact-checkers;
  • medical reviewers;
  • researchers;
  • journalists;
  • expert boards;
  • professional credentials.

We do not use AI-generated people to create the appearance of a larger editorial operation.

At present:

Duc Nguyen is the primary person responsible for Explained How’s editorial work.

If that changes, this page will be updated.

Future Contributors

As Explained How grows, the publication may work with additional:

  • writers;
  • editors;
  • fact-checkers;
  • researchers;
  • subject-matter reviewers;
  • visual contributors.

When real contributors begin performing meaningful editorial roles, they may be added to this page.

Their roles should reflect what they actually do.

For example:

Science Reviewer

should mean that a real person reviewed relevant scientific content.

Editor

should mean that the person actually performs editorial work.

Titles are not used simply to create trust signals.

Authorship and Editing

When Duc writes and edits the same article, the article may simply display:

By Duc Nguyen

There is generally no need to add:

Edited by Duc Nguyen

directly beside the byline when the same person performed both roles.

Doing so repeatedly can add little information.

Instead, the author profile and this Editorial Team page explain that Duc currently performs both functions.

If a different editor later edits an article, the page may then display:

Written by Jane Doe
Edited by Duc Nguyen

where appropriate.

Reviewer Credits

Similarly, when an article receives genuine external professional review, a separate credit may appear:

Written by Duc Nguyen
Reviewed by Jane Smith, MD

This creates a clear distinction between:

author

editor

and

expert reviewer.

Those roles should not be collapsed into one another unless the same person genuinely performs them and possesses the relevant qualifications.

Editorial Independence

Duc is also responsible for maintaining the separation between editorial conclusions and commercial relationships.

Explained How may eventually generate revenue through:

  • advertising;
  • affiliate commissions;
  • sponsorships;
  • other commercial arrangements.

Those relationships should not dictate factual conclusions.

Read:

[Ownership & Funding →](/ownership-funding/)

[Affiliate Disclosure →](/affiliate-disclosure/)

[Advertising & Sponsorship Policy →](/advertising-policy/)

Sponsored Content and Editorial Oversight

If Explained How publishes sponsored content, Duc retains responsibility for deciding whether it fits the publication and whether factual claims meet appropriate standards.

Sponsors should not receive automatic authority to:

  • dictate scientific conclusions;
  • suppress material limitations;
  • create fabricated first-hand testing;
  • prevent legitimate corrections.

Commercial content should also be disclosed appropriately.

Our Current Editorial Structure

Explained How’s current editorial structure is intentionally simple:

Duc Nguyen
Founder
↓
Owner
↓
Primary Author
↓
Editor
↓
Primary Fact-Checker
↓
Editorial Oversight

This reflects the publication as it actually operates today.

We prefer an accurate small structure over a fictional large one.

Who Is Accountable?

Readers should be able to identify who is responsible for the publication.

At present, primary accountability rests with:

Duc Nguyen
Founder, Owner & Editor
Explained How

Profile:

[Duc Nguyen →](/authors/)

Contact:

[Contact Explained How →](/contact/)

Contact the Editor

Readers may contact Explained How regarding:

  • factual errors;
  • source questions;
  • corrections;
  • unclear explanations;
  • technical issues;
  • editorial feedback;
  • potential expert contributions.

Email:
30***********@***il.com

WhatsApp:
+84 909 942 697

Facebook:
Duc Nguyen

Or visit:

[Contact Explained How →](/contact/)

Our Editorial Commitment

Explained How’s current editorial structure may be small, but the standards should not depend on the size of the organization.

Our commitment is:

Identify the real people responsible for the content.

Do not fabricate editorial roles.

Research before making authoritative claims.

Separate editorial review from specialist professional review.

Correct meaningful errors.

Be transparent about AI assistance.

Keep commercial relationships separate from factual conclusions.

Expand the team only when real contributors actually join the work.

For now, Duc Nguyen writes and edits Explained How.

That is the structure we disclose.