Editorial QA must prove that each factual claim is supported, current enough, accurately represented, and safe for the audience. Fluent language is not evidence. Review claims at sentence level and verify code/math/process independently.
Create a Claim Register
claim_id
exact claim
type: fact / observation / sample / recommendation
source URL/document/version/date
supporting passage or test evidence
risk: normal / unstable / high-stakes
reviewer and result
update trigger
High-risk areas include prices, laws, tax, medical/health, finance, security, product limits, dates, statistics, and claims about people/companies. Use qualified review when appropriate.
Run the QA Stack
- Source validity: primary, reachable, relevant, correctly scoped.
- Entailment: source actually supports claim.
- Freshness: unstable facts checked near publication.
- Originality/copyright: no copied structure/passages or excessive quotation.
- Math/code: execute samples and recompute values.
- Safety/privacy: no private data, unsafe instruction, or hidden credentials.
- Commercial truth: real availability, price, location, terms, testimonial, and results.
- Language parity: translations preserve meaning.
AI can flag possible issues but cannot be the sole verifier of its own draft.
Worked Example
A draft says Google guarantees indexing if you submit a sitemap. The claim register links Google’s documentation, which contradicts it. The correction says a sitemap helps discovery and monitoring but does not guarantee crawling/indexing.
Another paragraph gives a sample 20% conversion rate without label. It is changed to a clearly marked worked example with calculation, not a benchmark. A quoted sentence is paraphrased and cited within copyright limits.
Failure Cases to Diagnose
- Source exists, so claim passes: test direct support.
- Secondary blog for current product rule: use official docs.
- AI reviewer agrees with AI writer: require human/test evidence.
- Broken source ignored: replace or remove claim.
- Sample number looks like market data: label prominently.
- Correction after publish has no log: preserve correction state/date.
🇵🇰 Pakistan Angle
Use FBR, SBP, SECP, regulator, university/board, provincial authority, or provider sources where relevant. Do not generalize one province/city rule to Pakistan.
Check lakh/crore, PKR minor units, dates, phone formats, marla conventions, and Roman Urdu meaning. These details often create costly hallucinations despite fluent copy.
Maintain an update trigger for each unstable claim. A pricing statement may require a monthly check; a product feature may need review after release notes; a legal or regulator reference needs review by a qualified owner. A citation is not permanent proof when its underlying fact changes.
Hands-On Exercise
- Extract every factual claim from one draft.
- build the register.
- verify source support/freshness.
- execute code/math and label samples.
- approve, revise, or remove each claim.
Completion Rubric
- Claims are individually traceable.
- Primary sources directly support them.
- Unstable facts are dated/rechecked.
- Code/math and commercial state are independently verified.
- Samples cannot be mistaken for benchmarks.
- Corrections and update triggers exist.
Sources
- Google Search Central — Helpful content
- Google Search Central — Generative AI guidance
- Google Search Central — Spam policies
Key takeaway: approve claims, not prose—every unstable, numeric, technical, and commercial statement needs direct evidence or honest removal.