Skip to main content

Editorial methodology

Useful guidance needs visible evidence and independent review.

TSI uses a governed editorial workflow to turn scattered community information into clear next steps. The workflow is designed to stop unsupported or outdated work before publication, not to maximize article volume.

  1. Choose a real need

    TSI prioritizes demonstrated community-information gaps, corrections, and stale guidance before publishing something new.

  2. Research current sources

    Material claims must map to current primary or authoritative sources. Search snippets and AI answers are discovery aids, not evidence.

  3. Prepare the guide

    AI may assist with research organization and drafting, but it may not invent people, experience, quotations, organizations, credentials, statistics, or sources.

  4. Review independently

    A fact reviewer reconstructs material claims. A separate editorial reviewer checks usefulness, clarity, evidence limits, duplication, accessibility, and policy compliance.

  5. Apply the risk gate

    Medical, legal, financial, safety, crisis, emergency, and other manual-risk content also requires applicable qualified-human review and owner approval.

  6. Publish, monitor, and correct

    Approved guides carry source and freshness records. Changed evidence can trigger revision, withdrawal, or retirement.

Current publication status

TSI is in manual probation. Automated publication is disabled. Eligible work may move through research and independent review, but publication remains subject to the active risk and owner gates. Any scheduled runs are nonpublishing shadow evidence only: they cannot publish a guide or count as proof that autonomous publication is ready.