Purpose of these standards
These standards explain how CueLab decides whether a guide is ready to publish and how existing material is maintained. They are written for readers as well as for the editor, so the same rules used during revision are visible on the site. The aim is not to make every article look identical; it is to make each page clear about what it is trying to help the reader do.
Start with a real reader problem
A CueLab article should begin with a recognizable communication problem, not a generic topic. “Use fewer bullets” is not enough on its own; a useful guide has to show what goes wrong when several ideas compete for attention, what to change first, and how a presenter can check whether the revision improved the slide. Articles that cannot establish a distinct purpose are candidates for merging, rewriting, or removal from the index.
Evidence and source checking
Research claims are checked against the underlying publication or another authoritative source whenever practical. A source is used to support a specific point, not to decorate an article with links. CueLab distinguishes between findings from research, practical editorial judgment, and hypothetical examples, and it avoids turning a result from one population or task into a universal rule.
Examples must be honest and specific
Practical examples should match the actual topic. A chart article should show or describe a chart decision; a speaking article should include a speaking or rehearsal example; a teaching article should demonstrate the instructional choice being discussed. Hypothetical examples are labelled as such, and CueLab does not invent clients, students, interviews, experiments, performance gains, or survey results.
Original practical value
Where it improves the guide, CueLab adds original frameworks, before-and-after examples, checklists, worksheets, decision trees, annotated scripts, slide demonstrations, or rehearsal exercises. Decorative visuals are not treated as evidence of expertise. Priority is given to instructional visuals that help the reader see a decision, diagnose a problem, or perform a task.
Use of research and drafting tools
CueLab may use software tools during research, outlining, drafting, editing, or visual production. Tool output is never treated as a factual source by itself, and it should not be published merely because it reads smoothly. Before publication, material is revised for clarity, source support, internal consistency, topic-specific usefulness, and overlap with existing CueLab pages.
Publication dates and revisions
The published date reflects when a page first went live. An updated date should be used only when a substantive change has been made, such as correcting an important claim, adding a substantial new section, replacing an example, or materially improving the method. Dates are not changed simply to make the site appear more active.
Corrections
Readers can report a factual error, broken reference, unclear explanation, or accessibility problem through the Contact page. Reports should include the article URL and the specific passage in question. Corrections are evaluated against the source and the purpose of the guide; material may be revised, clarified, merged, or removed when that is the better editorial outcome.