Editorial standards
Quality, corrections, and AI use
How the network writes, fixes mistakes, and uses modern tools without compromising verification.
Quality standards
- Prioritize primary regulatory sources over marketing claims.
- Separate facts, scores, and opinion. Label editorial judgment clearly.
- Do not publish thin location spam or automated doorway pages on the parent site.
- Specialist hubs own depth; the parent owns network standards and discovery.
- Write for a careful consumer making a high-stakes decision—not for clickbait.
Corrections policy
- Report factual errors via hello@asktrusthub.com with the URL, the claimed error, and a source for the correction.
- Material factual corrections are reviewed promptly and applied network-wide when relevant.
- We note significant corrections on affected pages when the change could have influenced a decision.
- Disputes from providers are considered against public records—not against sponsorship willingness.
AI use
- We may use AI tools to draft, summarize, organize research, or assist engineering—never as an unsupervised source of licensing status.
- License numbers, authority status, and legal identity claims must be grounded in primary public sources or human verification.
- AI-generated copy is reviewed for accuracy, neutrality, and compliance with our independence policy before publication.
- We do not use AI to fabricate reviews, invent credentials, or simulate consumer testimonials.
Scope note
The parent site stays lean by design. Long-form guides and market directories belong on specialist Trust Hubs, under these same standards. If a page on any hub conflicts with this policy, network standards win—and the page should be corrected.
Report an error
Use the corrections process to submit a URL, the claimed error, and a primary source. Reports are evaluated against public records, not commercial relationships.