Source check
Current game rules and interface behavior are attributed to the official game where possible. Secondary competitors can reveal user questions, but they are not treated as the source of truth.
Editorial standardsShow the method.
Show the method.
Label the limits.
WordleSolver publishes practical word-game guidance under a team byline. This page explains how claims, calculations, examples, and updates are handled.
Policy updatedWho publishes the guides
WordleSolver Editorial Team
The team byline represents the research, product, and content work behind this independent site. We focus on Wordle clue logic, five-letter vocabulary, candidate filtering, and practical guess strategy.
We do not present an invented individual expert, claim access to a private answer list, or imply affiliation with The New York Times or any other game publisher. Product details are checked against the site's current implementation, and official-game claims are kept separate from our own findings.
- 1Answer the actual question
Each guide begins with the rule or decision a player needs, followed by evidence and examples.
- 2Use reproducible evidence
Corpus counts are calculated from the current site data and implementation claims are checked against the code.
- 3State what is unknown
We distinguish broad word-list coverage from official accepted guesses and possible daily answers.
How a guide is checked
Three checks before a claim earns a place
The standard changes with the claim: a game rule needs a primary source, while a corpus finding needs a calculation that can be repeated.
Data check
Letter frequencies and opener comparisons use WordleSolver's generated word data. The guide names the corpus size, measurement, and limitation beside the result.
Example check
Green, yellow, gray, and duplicate-letter examples are compared with the same filtering rules used by the live solver. Automated utility tests protect core cases.
Useful prose, not keyword inventory
Search research helps us understand the language and questions players use. It does not require every related phrase to be forced into a page. A guide should be readable from start to finish, cover one clear intent, and add a tested example, calculation, or product explanation that makes it more useful than a reworded competitor page.
Drafting and analysis tools may assist with calculations, structure, or language review. No page is presented as a first-person account that did not happen. Before publication, factual claims are reconciled with the source, data, or current product behavior described on the page.
What we will not claim
Clear boundaries build trust
Word games look simple, but answer pools, accepted guesses, and scoring goals are easy to blur. These are our standing guardrails.
A useful page cannot promise a Google position, and a high-coverage guess cannot promise a Wordle result.
Our broad English list supports pattern matching. It is not described as the current private daily-answer set.
A letter's share of the remaining corpus is labeled as corpus coverage, not the probability of today's answer.
Competitor pages inform gap analysis. Published explanations use our own structure, examples, tests, and measurements.
Editorial pages are designed around the player's task. If commercial relationships are added later, they should be disclosed where they affect a recommendation.
Read the work
Browse Wordle guides