Editorial
Editorial standards
What we publish on RewriteAIForMe — articles, guides, glossary entries, research notes, and product pages — is held to a single editorial standard. This page explains it.
Our editorial promise
We publish writing that is useful first and discoverable second. Pages exist because they answer a real question, document a real workflow, or define a real concept — not because a keyword had volume. We would rather publish fewer pages well than more pages poorly. Every piece carries an updated date, attribution, and a clear scope; pieces that no longer hold up are revised or retired rather than left to drift.
Sourcing and accuracy
Factual claims that affect a reader's decision — statistics, named studies, product behaviour, legal or policy assertions — are verified against primary sources before publication. Where claims are interpretive or based on our own editorial observation, we say so explicitly and frame them accordingly. We do not invent statistics, fabricate citations, or attribute quotes that cannot be confirmed. When we are not sure, we say we are not sure.
How we use AI in our own publishing
We build a tool that helps people write with AI well, so we use AI in our own writing where it serves the work — typically for structural drafts, formatting, and editorial sparring. A human editor is responsible for every piece we publish: for the argument, the accuracy, the voice, and the byline. We do not publish unedited AI output. Our full AI usage policy covers this in more detail.
Tone, fairness, and inclusion
We write with calm confidence. We avoid hype, undue alarm, and absolute claims that cannot be defended. We refer to competitors fairly and by category where comparison is relevant, and avoid mischaracterising what other tools do or do not do. We use language that respects readers across professional, cultural, and linguistic backgrounds, and we take feedback on this seriously when readers raise it.
Corrections and updates
When we get something wrong, we correct it. Material factual errors are corrected with a note at the foot of the affected page indicating what changed and when. Non-material revisions — clarifying a sentence, adding an example, improving a heading — are made in line with our standard editorial cadence and reflected in the page's updated date. Readers who spot an error can write to us; we treat those messages as priority editorial inputs.
Independence
We do not accept paid placement, sponsored mentions, or affiliate compensation in our editorial content. Where we mention third-party tools, models, or services, we do so as part of honest analysis of the field — not because anyone paid for the mention. Our commercial revenue is described on our About page and is structurally separate from editorial decisions.
Spotted a problem?
If something we published is wrong, unclear, or out of date, please tell us. We read every message and respond personally.