Hurt Advice publishes information for people making high-stakes decisions after an accident. These standards explain how we check sources, authorship, clarity, disclosures, and updates before an article goes live.
We build articles around real legal questions. Each guide should answer a specific problem clearly, quickly, and with California context when it matters.
A saved draft is not automatically published. Before an article goes live, it must meet the trust and usability requirements in our review process.
Our editorial standards support clear answers and reader trust at the same time. That means answer-first summaries, stable section headings, useful related guidance, and no repetitive filler.
We avoid shortcuts that create trust risk or long-term cleanup work.
An article may be prepared and published by the Hurt Advice Editorial Team after it passes documented sourcing, originality, quality, accessibility, and live-page checks. That byline is an editorial attribution, not an attorney-review claim.
These standards are applied to the editorial blog lane under /blog, while evergreen service-support content follows the same trust rules but can live on category routes when that is the canonical destination.
Editorial workflow
Hurt Advice uses these checkpoints to confirm that legal information answers a real question from an injured person, identifies its sources, explains its limits, and stays useful when laws or public guidance change.
The topic should address a clear reader problem, have one permanent destination, and add information that an existing guide does not already provide.
Legal claims, medical context, deadlines, source links, and calls to action should be checked against the full article and its summary.
Published guidance stays connected to relevant lawyers, resources, locations, blog archives, and trust pages so readers can continue their research.
Publication quality checks
These checks connect the public blog, the authors directory, the source policy, and the press and trust hub into one visible publishing standard.
These standards continue after publication. Guidance returns to editorial review when it becomes stale, loses important context, or no longer meets the publication's trust requirements. You can also review the source policy, the authors and reviewers directory, and the current blog.
Editorial FAQs
A publish-ready Hurt Advice article addresses a clear reader problem, identifies its author or reviewer, supports factual claims with reliable sources, links to useful context, and offers a practical next step.
Editorial standards make guidance easier to understand by aligning the headline, visible sections, cited sources, related guidance, and any legal-review context.
An article should be updated when law, sources, medical context, related guidance, author information, images, or the practical next step no longer match the current information.