Accessibility Statement

1.What we aim for, and who is responsible

GoPickStack aims to meet WCAG 2.2 Level AA, the current W3C Recommendation, across every page of this site.

Muhammad Shadab Shams, the operator of GoPickStack, is responsible for that. It is a one-person site, so there is no accessibility committee to blame or route around. Reports come to the person who can fix them.

Accessibility is not a feature we add at the end here. It shapes how the site is built, which is why most of the measures below are structural rather than corrective.

2.What we actually do

• Semantic structure first. Real headings in order, real lists, real tables, real nav and main landmarks. Screen readers get structure rather than a stream of styled divs.
• Keyboard operability. Every interactive control, including the consent panel, the shortlist, the comparison filters, the AI Copilot, and every dialog, is reachable and operable by keyboard alone, with a focus indicator you can actually see.
• Colour is never the only signal. Rating tiers, pass and fail states, and availability indicators carry a text label or an icon as well as a colour, so the page still works in monochrome or with a colour vision deficiency.
• Text scales. Content remains readable at 200 percent zoom, and layout reflows rather than forcing a horizontal scroll on a phone.
• Reduced motion is honoured. Scroll animations, transitions, and parallax follow the operating system's reduced-motion preference and switch themselves off when it is set. This is a build rule, not a per-page setting.
• Form controls are labelled. Every input has a real associated label, a required marker that is announced, and an error message that is tied to the field it concerns.
• Tables are marked up for assistive technology. Header cells carry scope attributes, and data tables read as tables rather than as a jumble of text.
• Alt text describes purpose, not pixels. An image is described by what it conveys, and a decorative image is marked as decorative so it is skipped entirely.
• Link text says where it goes. Descriptive destinations, not click here or read more, so a screen reader user can decide from a list of links alone whether it is worth following.
• Plain language throughout. The writing is short sentences and ordinary words, which is an accessibility benefit before any tool runs.

3.Known limitations

A statement that lists no problems is not a statement, it is marketing. Here is what is not right yet, as of the effective date above.

• Dense data tables on narrow screens. Several long-form reviews and comparison pages carry wide pricing and feature tables. On a phone these need horizontal scrolling, and we have not yet produced a card-based alternative for every one of them.
• Our own accessibility checks are manual. We test with a keyboard and a screen reader as part of the work, but we have not completed a systematic pass over all 200-plus pages, so we cannot claim every page is clean.
• AI Copilot output is not fully checked. Generated answers are not reviewed for screen reader behaviour on every response, and generated text carries ordinary paragraph semantics rather than richer structure.
• Third-party content is outside our control. Anything a vendor supplies, including images, video, and embedded material behind an outbound link, may not meet our standard. We do not control it and cannot fix it.
• Some animation is decorative rather than functional. Where a scroll animation conveys nothing that the text does not already say, it is still an animation that has to be watched.

If you hit a barrier that is not on this list, that is a gap in the list, and we would like to hear about it. Report it the way described below.

4.How this was assessed

This is a self-assessment by the operator, not a third-party audit. Nobody independent has tested this site against WCAG 2.2 AA and issued a conformance report, and we are not claiming one.

What that means practically is that the measures listed above are commitments we hold ourselves to and can be held to, and the limitations listed are ones we found ourselves. If a genuine third-party audit would give readers more confidence, we would welcome it and would publish the report. Until then, treat this as an honest account of where the site actually stands.

5.Reporting a barrier

Email Muhammad Shadab Shams at hi@gopickstack.com with three things: the page URL, what you were trying to do, and what happened instead. A screen reader and browser combination helps if you have it, but it is not required.

You will get an acknowledgement within 3 business days, and a fix or a clear explanation within 30 days. Those are targets rather than contractual guarantees, but we hold ourselves to them and we would rather be told we missed one than left unaware.

You do not need to prove you are a paying customer, a subscriber, or anyone in particular. You do need to be using the site, which is the point.

6.Formal enforcement and complaints

In the European Union, the European Accessibility Act applies to certain commercial services provided to consumers from 28 June 2025. In the United Kingdom, the Equality Act 2010 covers digital content. If a barrier is not resolved and you believe the law has been broken, you can complain to your national authority: for digital accessibility in the UK that is the Equality and Human Rights Commission, and in the EU it is the accessibility ombudsman or the relevant authority in your country.

That route is open to everyone and you do not need to exhaust anything with us first. We would simply rather hear from you directly and fix it.

7.Keeping this statement current

We review this statement as the site changes, and whenever something on the known limitations list is fixed we remove it rather than leaving it to look better than it is. Substantive changes are recorded in our changelog.

The effective date at the top of the page tells you how current this is. If it is months old, treat the limitations list as a lower bound on what is broken rather than an exact map.