Editorial Standards
Orani Almanac operates under a clearly defined editorial process. Each article produced here passes through sourcing, drafting, editorial review, and factual verification before it reaches a reader.
01 — Foundation
Orani Almanac 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.
Nutrition is a field where popular culture and published research frequently diverge. A sentence that sounds compelling in a headline may describe a finding taken out of context, a single observational study, or a concept that has been contested in subsequent research. Our editors keep a working knowledge of the current state of published dietary guidelines — not to produce academic papers, but to ensure that what appears here reflects considered reading rather than trend-following.
Articles published on Orani Almanac 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.
02 — Process
Writers propose topics from one of three sources: observations from their own kitchen practice, questions surfaced by readers, or emerging themes in published nutritional research. Topics are reviewed by the editorial desk against a running list of recently covered subjects — repetition within a twelve-week window is flagged.
Writers are asked to identify at least two published sources — ideally peer-reviewed or from recognised dietary guidance bodies — before beginning a draft. These sources are logged in the article's working file, accessible to editors throughout review. Writers do not need to cite these in the final piece, but editors use them as a baseline during verification.
Every draft passes through a two-stage review: structural feedback from the assigning editor, followed by a factual read-through by a second editor. The second editor focuses specifically on any numerical claims, nutritional proportions mentioned, or references to dietary research. Corrections are made before scheduling.
Before a piece is scheduled, the editor checks any external links still present in the piece — including references to published research or official guidance. Links to sources that have become unavailable or have been significantly revised are updated or removed. Articles are not published with broken source references.
Once approved, pieces are scheduled and published without further alteration to the body text. If a factual error is identified post-publication — by a reader, editor, or the writer — a correction note is appended to the piece at the top of the article. The original passage is marked and the correction is dated. We do not remove text silently.
Articles older than eighteen months are flagged for review. Where dietary guidance has shifted or new research has substantially changed the picture described in an older piece, the article is either updated with a revision note or retired from the active archive. The publication date and most recent revision date are displayed in the article header.
03 — Sourcing
UK government dietary guidelines, NHS guidance on everyday eating, and guidance from registered nutrition bodies form the baseline reference point for any article making factual claims about balanced meals or daily intake.
Where a specific finding is referenced, writers are encouraged to trace it to its source publication rather than to a secondary news report. Observational findings are distinguished from controlled trials where that distinction is editorially meaningful.
Several contributors to this publication hold qualifications in nutrition, dietetics, or food science. Where a contributor's background informs an article, it is noted in the author byline. We do not describe contributor qualifications in ways that imply specialist professional authority over individual readers' routines.
Articles focused on seasonal cooking, gut-friendly recipes, and home-cooked meals draw on culinary knowledge as much as nutritional data. Recipe-led content is reviewed for balance and proportion rather than strict nutritional completeness — it is kitchen writing, not a dietary programme.
04 — Writers
Before an article is accepted, writers are asked to declare any relationship — paid or otherwise — with brands, producers, or organisations that could have an interest in the subject covered. This includes sponsored content, affiliate arrangements, advisory roles, and product gifting. Undisclosed relationships that are identified post-publication result in a correction note and, in significant cases, retraction of the piece.
Writers are instructed not to present nutritional claims in absolute terms. "May support," "is associated with," and "evidence suggests" are preferred over formulations that imply supported outcomes. The distinction between correlation and causation in nutritional research is noted in our style guide and flagged during editorial review wherever a writer has overstepped it.
Personal accounts of eating habits, meal planning, and kitchen routines are welcome in this publication. They are presented clearly as individual observations. Writers are asked not to project their personal experience as applicable to all readers, and editors flag passages where the move from first-person observation to general recommendation has been made without sufficient grounding.
Orani Almanac is not a news publication. There is no pressure to publish a piece quickly because a subject is trending. Articles are held until they are ready. This means a piece submitted in one month may not appear for several weeks — and that the review cycle is treated as genuinely important rather than a formality to be rushed through before a publishing window closes.
Editors per article
Archive review cycle
Corrections noted publicly
Silent removals
05 — Notice
Orani Almanac is an independent editorial publication focused on everyday wellness practices. The publication is not affiliated with any commercial, governmental, or institutional body.
Articles published on Orani Almanac 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.
We recommend speaking with a qualified wellness or nutrition professional before introducing any new habit or routine to your daily life, particularly if you have specific dietary requirements.
The editorial process described on this page represents our standard approach. Individual articles may vary in length, sourcing depth, and editorial approach based on the nature of the subject. Where an article departs significantly from this standard, the editor's note at the head of the piece will reflect that.
06 — Questions