Editorial Methodology
Every article published in Dargo Gazette follows a defined process of research, drafting, independent review, and sourcing verification. This page documents that process without qualification.
The Foundation of Our Editorial Work
Dargo Gazette operates under the following editorial principles: articles are reviewed by at least one second editor before publication, sources are cited where appropriate, corrections are noted publicly, and writers disclose any commercial relationships that could influence their selection of subject matter.
The publication does not accept payment in exchange for editorial coverage. Sponsorship and commercial partnerships, when they exist, are clearly labelled and maintained separate from the editorial process. No advertiser, partner, or affiliated organisation has influence over article selection, framing, or conclusions.
Articles published on Dargo Gazette are editorial in nature and reflect the writers' observations on everyday wellness practices. The content is not intended as professional advice, nor as guidance for the management of any specific condition. Readers with specific concerns about their daily routines are encouraged to speak with a qualified wellness professional.
From Idea to Publication: the Seven Steps
Topic Selection
Topics are selected on the basis of reader relevance, current evidence in published research, and editorial interest. The editorial team reviews topic proposals against a set of standing criteria: practical utility, alignment with the publication's areas of coverage, and originality relative to recent output.
Source Gathering
Writers assemble a minimum of three independent, published sources before drafting begins. Sources are assessed for recency (preference for work published within the last five years), institutional credibility, and methodological clarity. Primary sources are preferred over secondary summaries.
First Draft
The first draft is written by the assigned writer and submitted to the editorial queue. At this stage, the draft is assessed for factual accuracy, structural coherence, and compliance with the publication's style guide. Internal fact flags are applied where claims require verification.
Editorial Review
A second editor reviews the flagged draft independently of the original writer. This review focuses on sourcing quality, factual precision, and editorial register. Claims that cannot be traced to a verifiable source are either supported, reframed, or removed before the piece advances.
Sourcing Verification
All cited sources are accessed directly at this stage. Paywalled content is noted and the original abstract or conclusion is verified against the claim it supports. Where a source has been retracted or substantially revised, the article is updated accordingly before or after publication.
Sub-editing
The sub-editor applies final copy-editing — checking grammar, house style, heading hierarchy, and internal consistency of references. The sub-edit is the last stage before a piece enters the publication queue. No factual alterations are made at this stage without returning to the editorial review step.
Publication and Post-Publication
Published articles are considered living documents. Where a factual error is identified after publication, a correction is appended to the article, noting the original claim, the correction, and the date it was applied. Significant corrections are flagged in the following edition's editor's note. Reader-submitted corrections are reviewed within five working days of receipt.
What We Accept as a Qualified Source
Peer-reviewed research
Articles published in indexed academic journals following peer review constitute the strongest category of source. We note the journal, year, and lead author where a specific study is cited. We do not cite pre-print work as confirmed evidence without noting its pre-publication status.
Authoritative institutional publications
Position papers, guidelines, and published recommendations from established institutions in the areas of nutrition, physical activity, and public wellness are accepted as secondary sources. These are used to provide context rather than primary evidence for specific claims.
Practitioner interviews
Interviews with named, verifiably credentialed practitioners in relevant fields are used as experiential source material. Practitioner names, roles, and affiliations are confirmed before inclusion. Practitioner opinion is distinguished from published evidence in the text.
Sources we do not use
Anonymous online sources, commercial brand communications, press releases without independent confirmation, social media posts, and undated or uncredited web content are not accepted as sources. Aggregator sites that summarise research without linking to originals are handled with caution and used only for orientation, never as primary evidence.
How We Handle Errors
Errors in published work are taken seriously. Any factual inaccuracy identified — by the editorial team, by a reader, or by a cited source — is reviewed promptly and resolved within five working days where possible.
Minor corrections (typographic errors, broken references, formatting issues) are applied silently. Substantive corrections — where a factual claim, figure, or conclusion has been changed — are noted at the foot of the article with the date and a brief explanation of what changed.
Retractions are rare but applied where an article as a whole is found to be substantially inaccurate or where the source base has been invalidated. Retracted articles are replaced with a notice explaining the retraction, not simply deleted.
Commercial Relationships
Dargo Gazette is an independent editorial publication. Revenue comes from display advertising and, where applicable, clearly labelled partnership content. The editorial team is not involved in advertising sales.
Writers disclose any existing commercial relationship with a brand, product, or organisation mentioned in their work at the time of submission. This disclosure is reviewed by the editor before publication. Where a conflict cannot be resolved through disclosure, the writer is not assigned to that topic.
Partnership content — where a commercial relationship exists with the subject of an article — is published under a visible "Supported Content" label. This label is applied before the article title and in the metadata. Supported content follows the same editorial standards as independent content.
Common Questions About Our Standards
Questions About Our Standards
The editorial team welcomes questions about our process and sourcing criteria. Correspondence regarding specific articles, correction requests, or pitch submissions may be directed to the editorial office.
Contact the Editorial Office