Editorial Policy

Purpose of this policy

Online Dating Guide publishes commercial and informational content about dating platforms, dating safety, relationship-oriented resources and related products. Because some pages can influence purchases, subscriptions or personal safety decisions, our editorial process needs clear boundaries. This policy defines those boundaries.

The publication is generic rather than personality-led. Readers should be able to understand the basis of a recommendation from the evidence and reasoning on the page, not from an unsupported appeal to authority.

We separate four types of content

These categories can appear on the same page, but they should not be confused. A commission does not make a product better, and a product feature does not automatically justify a recommendation.

Source hierarchy

For dating-platform facts, we prefer official product pages, help centers, safety documentation, privacy policies, terms and relevant app-store information. For public-safety claims, government agencies and established safety organizations take priority. For broader user behavior, high-quality survey research can provide context.

Secondary articles may help identify questions or competing interpretations, but important claims should be traced to stronger evidence where reasonably available. We do not cite a long source list merely to create the appearance of research. Sources should support specific propositions in the article.

Current information and freshness

Dating platforms can change pricing, features, subscription terms, user flows and availability. Pages that depend on these facts require more frequent review than evergreen educational content. We assign content to a freshness class and recheck faster-moving commercial facts more often.

Updating a date without materially reviewing the content is not an editorial update. Sitemap modification dates should correspond to substantive changes, not routine file generation.

Corrections

If we identify a material factual error, we correct the affected passage and recheck related pages that may repeat the same information. Centralized platform data should be updated where appropriate so a correction propagates through future production. Minor typographical fixes do not require the same treatment as a change to price, safety information or a recommendation basis.

Review independence

Affiliate programs can influence which commercial opportunities are available to the publication, but they do not determine the editorial conclusion. A platform without an affiliate program can still appear in rankings, reviews, comparisons or alternatives when it is relevant to the user’s decision. A platform with an affiliate program can receive a negative or qualified assessment when the evidence supports it.

We do not publish fake test results, fabricated member counts or invented success rates. If a claim cannot be verified, it should be omitted, qualified or clearly attributed to the source making it.

Affiliate disclosure

Some pages may contain affiliate links that can generate revenue when a reader signs up or buys a product. Monetized recommendations should contain a clear disclosure close enough to the commercial content for readers to understand the relationship. Affiliate links should be technically marked appropriately, including sponsored attributes where relevant.

Ancillary products such as journals, books, gifts, flowers or privacy tools should only be recommended when they fit the dating-related user need. We do not insert unrelated products simply because they offer a commission.

Safety and high-consequence claims

Dating safety content requires a higher evidence standard than lifestyle opinion. Guidance on romance scams, financial requests, privacy and first meetings should rely on authoritative sources such as the FTC, FBI or established safety organizations. We avoid implying that any platform, verification badge or security product can guarantee personal safety.

RAINN notes that no action can guarantee safety, while offering practical strategies intended to reduce risk. That distinction is important. Safety advice should focus on risk reduction, consent, boundaries and support rather than blaming users for another person’s harmful behavior.

Research and survey statistics

Statistics are presented with their scope and date where material. A U.S. survey should not be described as a global finding. An older survey can still be useful, but it should not be presented as current evidence for a rapidly changing platform market without qualification.

AI-assisted production

Automated tools may assist with research organization, drafting or technical production, but they do not lower our evidence standard. Generated text must not introduce invented statistics, unsupported product facts, fabricated testing experience or nonexistent sources. Factual commercial pages require source checking before publication.

Internal linking and page quality

Internal links should help readers move between a master topic and more specific needs. Hubs link to their child pages, child pages link back to parents and useful siblings, and relevant sections connect across reviews, comparisons, alternatives, safety, guides and resources. Links should explain why the destination is useful rather than being added solely for search-engine manipulation.

Page creation standard

We do not create a new page for every keyword variation. A page should exist because it satisfies a distinct information need and can add useful information beyond an existing URL. Near-duplicate location, synonym or word-order pages are avoided. If a new topic does not justify a separate page, it belongs in a section, table, FAQ or existing guide.

Reader pathways

Sources and evidence

• Federal Trade Commission, Romance Scams
• FBI, Romance Scams
• RAINN, Tips for Safer Dating
• Pew Research Center, Online Dating in the U.S.