Editorial Policy

Research and practical advice are different

Measurement rules should have an identifiable source. Whenever possible, we link to the original research or a university-hosted copy. A published method is not automatically accurate for every person, so we describe its limitations alongside its use.

Outfit suggestions are practical options, not scientific conclusions. We explain the fitting problem a suggestion may address and encourage you to try the garment while sitting and moving.

Standards for the calculator

• Describe the inputs and the rule actually used by the code.
• Distinguish a match to criteria from a complete body-shape classification.
• Explain borderline results without invented confidence percentages.
• Do not use a calculator result to infer health, fertility, ethnicity or attractiveness.

The methodology page records the thresholds and worked examples.

Authorship and experience

Rizwan Aslam is the named author of this website’s guides. We do not claim professional qualifications, product testing, clinical review or interviews unless the relevant page documents them. Examples created to explain a calculation are labeled as examples, not reader case studies.

We do not assign body-shape labels to celebrities based on unverified photographs. Camera angle, clothing and posture can change how proportions appear.

Commercial content

A sponsored recommendation or a link that earns commission should be disclosed next to the relevant content. Payment should not be presented as evidence that a product is the best choice. Readers should compare the garment’s size chart, return terms and fit instead of relying on a body-shape label.

Corrections and updates

Report an error through our contact page. A correction report is a request for review, not an automatic change. Substantive changes should explain the corrected issue and carry a truthful update date. Dates should not be refreshed only to make unchanged content look newer.

We aim to keep one clear purpose for each guide. Adding more pages with the same answer does not help readers.

Sources you can inspect

For numerical body-shape criteria, consult University of Oregon: Sokolowski and Bettencourt’s FFIT paper (PDF). We distinguish the original rule from modifications and our website’s own sensitivity check.

Our approach to authorship and clear sourcing is also informed by Google’s guidance on helpful, reliable content. This is editorial guidance, not certification or a ranking guarantee.