As scientists within the field of battery research we may often find it quite difficult to match and trust the promises given in press releases and high-profile papers. Even though there are real breakthroughs, where the results indeed are as impressive as they are marketed to be, we may as often find the reporting of "revolutionary" results to omit critical aspects of the methods and materials used. The absolute majority of researchers do not actively pursue to present their science in any untrue fashion, but poor (ethical) judgement could affect anyone working long hours in a gloomy lab at dusk and at the same time feel being pressed for publications and citations. Here, we outline ten ways to make your results appear more attractive and groundbreaking than they actually are, especially to laypeople that might not appreciate the full range of difficulties associated with battery research. Consider it a light-hearted entry with respect to scientific quality in methodology and dissemination, that might assist you in looking for nebulous reporting practices in your own and your peers' work, but please do not consider it a guide, but a humorous contrast to the real publishing guidelines recently launched. [2][3][4] 1. Always compare your results against the state-of-the-art from 2010

Heat treatment of LLZO garnets can effectively remove lithium hydroxide and carbonate layers from its surface, increase the Li dynamics in the structure and improve the processing of composite polymer electrolytes for solid-state batteries.

Semi-solid solvent-free electrolytes are created from a single-ion conducting polymer electrolyte, a classic polymer and a plasticizing Li-salt.