ScentSearch
Search scents →
ScentSearch
Search scents →
Last updated: August 29, 2026
This page describes how we source, check and correct what we publish. It covers the making guides, the scent note pages, and the product information shown in search results.
We work from the primary document wherever one exists. For a technical standard that means the standard's own record — its title, its status marker, and the edition currently marked active — not a secondary summary of it. Summaries go stale, and we have found them wrong about which edition is current.
Every source URL is checked before it is published. Only links that resolve are linked. Where we can identify a source but not a working address for it, we cite it in plain text rather than publishing a link we have guessed at.
Supplier, retailer and educational pages carry the date we accessed them, because the figures on them — prices, temperatures, load percentages — change without notice.
We say so, and we show the disagreement rather than choosing a side and presenting it as settled. Several sections of the guides exist specifically because published advice conflicts: pour temperatures that are blamed for the same defect from opposite directions, wick charts that recommend different sizes for the same container, and a scientific paper that gives two different values for the same measurement in the same article.
Where we cannot resolve a contradiction, the guide says we cannot resolve it.
We say that too, in the place where it matters rather than in a disclaimer at the bottom.
If a figure comes from a laboratory's description of ordinary practice rather than from the standard itself, we attribute it that way. If a document is paywalled or unreachable and we have not read it, we do not cite it — we find a source we have read, or we leave the claim out. If a convention circulates widely in the craft community but we cannot trace it to a manufacturer or a standard, we label it as common practice rather than as a rule.
Instructions that could cause injury if they are wrong are held to a higher standard than the rest of the page. They are attributed, they are stated plainly rather than hedged, and where widely published advice is dangerous we contradict it explicitly and say why.
The making guides involve molten wax, open flame and concentrated materials. Each one opens with its own safety notice, and each says the same thing: where a manufacturer's or supplier's guidance differs from ours, follow theirs. We are not a substitute for the documentation that came with your materials.
ScentSearch uses AI in several places, and we would rather describe them than leave you guessing.
In search. Queries are interpreted with an AI model to work out which notes, moods and product types you mean. Ranking itself is ordinary matching, not a model.
In product data. Most scent notes come from the merchant's own listing. Where a source publishes none, some notes are AI-assisted. We record which is which, and AI-derived notes are held at lower confidence than documented ones. This is described further on the About page.
In the guides. Research, source-checking and drafting are AI-assisted. Every factual claim in a guide is checked against a named source before publication, and a person reviews and edits the result. Where a claim could not be verified, the guide says so rather than quietly dropping it.
When we find something wrong, we correct it and change the page's update date, which appears at the top of every guide alongside the date it was first published.
We do not currently keep a public corrections log. Where a correction changes the substance of a claim rather than fixing a typo, our intention is to note what changed on the page itself rather than edit silently — but we would rather describe that as what we aim to do than present it as a standing policy we have not yet built the practice to guarantee.
We are not a manufacturer or a retailer. Many product links are affiliate links, which means we may earn a commission if you buy through them, at no extra cost to you. This is set out in our Terms of Use.
The guides cite sources, including suppliers and manufacturers. A source being cited is not an endorsement, and where a source has a commercial interest in the advice it is giving, the guide says so.
The making guides are written by Bryan Schmidt, whose professional background is in thermal systems — US Navy submarine service as a nuclear electrician's mate, and Senior Reactor Operator at civilian nuclear plants since 2020. He is not a chandler and has not sold candles commercially.
ScentSearch itself began with a comparison problem: fragrance oils sold under the same name by different suppliers, with nothing on the page to distinguish them, and finished candles scattered across enough retailers that comparing them properly wasn't practical. Full background is on the About page.
That distinction matters for how you read these guides. The claim is training in heat transfer and thermodynamics applied to a subject where the published guidance contradicts itself — not industry standing, and not production experience. Where a manufacturer's guidance differs from ours, follow theirs.
Every guide ends with its full source list, so you can check the reasoning rather than take it on authority.
If you think something here is wrong, please tell us through the Contact page. Corrections are welcome and we would rather hear about a mistake than leave it up.
About · Contact · Privacy Policy · Terms of Use · Guides · For brands