Who writes for us
Every article on Dot Net Masters is written by an experienced engineer, technical writer, or developer educator with hands-on knowledge of the topic. We do not publish AI-generated filler, spun content, or vendor-supplied marketing posts. Contributors are listed on each article and have a public author page on the site.
Commissioning
Articles begin life as a pitch — either from an external contributor through our Become Our Author form, or from a member of our editorial team. Pitches are evaluated against three criteria:
- Technical depth — does the piece reveal something a working engineer would actually want to know?
- Originality — is the angle, the example, or the conclusion novel, or is this another rehash of the .NET docs?
- Practical value — can a reader take the article and apply it to real work?
Writing & review
Once commissioned, the author writes a draft. Every draft is reviewed by at least one editor for clarity, accuracy, and tone. Code samples are run locally before publication — if a snippet doesn't compile or doesn't behave as described, it doesn't ship.
For tutorials and architecture pieces, we additionally ask a second engineer with relevant production experience to read the technical sections. We do not consider a piece "edited" until at least two pairs of eyes have signed off.
Fact-checking
Claims about specific .NET versions, framework APIs, language features, performance numbers, and historical events are checked against primary sources — Microsoft documentation, BCL source on GitHub, language specifications, RFCs, and contemporary trade press for historical pieces. Where a claim cannot be verified, we either remove it or label it clearly as opinion or recollection.
Corrections
We make mistakes. When we do, we correct them in public. Substantive corrections are noted at the bottom of the article with a date and a short description of what changed. Cosmetic corrections (typos, broken links) are made silently. If you spot an error in a published article, please email the editorial team via our Contact page and we'll review the report within three business days.
Updates & evergreen content
Tutorials and reference articles are reviewed periodically — at least annually — to confirm the .NET versions, package APIs, and tooling references they describe are still accurate. Articles that have been refreshed are marked with the latest review date.
Independence
Dot Net Masters is editorially independent. No vendor, sponsor, or advertiser has any input into what we publish, what we recommend, or how we describe a product. Our review independence is described in detail on the Review Disclaimer page.
Conflicts of interest
Authors disclose any relationships — employment, consulting, advising, ownership stakes — that could reasonably be seen as relevant to the topic of a piece. Disclosures appear inline at the bottom of the affected article.
Reader feedback
We treat reader feedback as part of the editorial process. Substantive technical critiques are forwarded to the author and frequently lead to article updates. Tips that lead to a published piece are credited (with the tipster's permission).