Data accuracy & sources
Wood data is only useful if you can trust it. Here's an honest look at what we've verified, what's still provisional, and how to flag anything that looks wrong. We'd rather show our work than ask you to take our word for it.
How we review
A species marked reviewed has had its Janka hardness and botanical name verified against a primary reference source (The Wood Database), with the citation recorded. Other fields — cost, workability, movement, and use guidance — are well-researched but not yet part of this formal verification pass. Janka numbers in particular vary by source and sample, so we treat them as representative, not absolute, and show a range where sources differ.
Spot something wrong?
Corrections are welcome and genuinely appreciated. Woodworkers know their woods. If a figure or note looks off, open an issue on GitHub with the species and what you'd change. Sourced corrections get applied fastest.