Editorial methodology

WorldPlacesExplained publishes factual reference pages about geographic places. Our workflow can use software and language models to organize research and prepare drafts, but generated text is never treated as evidence. Publication depends on independent sources, automated quality checks, and editorial approval.

Source requirements

New place pages require evidence from at least two independent domains. We prefer official institutions, public authorities, universities, museums, recognized reference works, and established publishers. Search snippets, mirrors, and repeated syndication do not count as independent confirmation.

Drafting and verification

Drafts are written from sources opened during the research run. Unsupported dates, measurements, rankings, and institutional claims are excluded. Each stored factual claim must retain its source reference, and pages that fail this check remain unpublished or require review.

Individual editorial value

A page is commissioned only when its sources support a useful angle beyond a generic summary. Its section selection follows the subject and available evidence rather than a universal article template. New drafts are also compared with existing pages to detect repeated language and overly similar structure.

Human review

Automated research and drafting produce a review version, not an automatic publication. A reviewer must confirm the page's source coverage, factual specificity, readability, and independent value before the revision can replace a live article.

Updates and corrections

Existing pages are revised through a separate review version so an unapproved rewrite cannot replace the live page. Sources are shown on supported articles. Corrections can be requested through the project repository linked from our public site information.

Browse the data resources or return to the places directory. Canonical methodology URL: https://www.worldplacesexplained.com/editorial-methodology.