Editorial Policy | Grammarlyzer

Grammarlyzer exists to help writers solve practical English grammar and usage problems. Each page should answer a real writing question, show examples in context, and help users decide what to write next. We do not invent credentials or present automated suggestions as final authority.

The learning pages are written for people who need a clear answer while editing an email, school assignment, report, resume, support message, or public page. Our editorial goal is to make the correct choice explainable, not just to name a rule. A useful page should show the decision, the reason, the common mistake, and the kind of context where the advice might change.

The Grammarlyzer Editorial Team

The Grammarlyzer Editorial Team is responsible for grammar explanations, examples, review notes, metadata, and internal-link quality across the public learning pages. The team writes under the Grammarlyzer name so pages can be maintained as living product documentation instead of one-time posts. We do not use invented individual biographies, unverified academic titles, or fictional expert names to make a page look more authoritative.

Grammar and usage guidance on this site reflects standard edited American English, checked against major reference works including The Chicago Manual of Style, Garner's Modern English Usage, Merriam-Webster, and the AP Stylebook. When a rule is context-dependent or genuinely contested, the page says so. The byline Reviewed by the Grammarlyzer Editorial Team indicates the page has been checked against this policy for practical usefulness, example accuracy, and structural completeness.

How Topics Are Selected

Recurring Writing Problems

We prioritize grammar issues that cause real confusion in emails, essays, reports, resumes, and everyday writing.

Checker Follow-Up Needs

If a checker suggestion points to a rule users need to understand, we try to connect it to a focused lesson or hub page.

Useful Clusters

Related topics are grouped into hubs such as confused words, punctuation, sentence structure, modal verbs, and business or academic writing.

Reader Utility and Topical Relevance

We only publish pages that answer a genuine writing question and stand on their own as useful guidance. Topics must connect to a real confusion writers face — not just fill a content gap. Pages that are too narrow or repetitive are kept in draft until they can be rewritten to provide clear, independent value.

How Examples Are Written

Examples should be short enough to scan but specific enough to teach. A useful example normally shows the incorrect form, the corrected form, and the reason the correction works. We prefer practical contexts such as workplace email, school writing, technical documentation, reports, and casual conversation over generic placeholder sentences.

We avoid examples that depend on private personal data, stereotypes, unsafe advice, or a joke that distracts from the rule. When possible, examples include a small real-world signal: a deadline, a report, a class assignment, a product update, a meeting, a citation, or a support message. That extra context helps readers understand why a correction is right.

For confused-word pages, examples should show both the wrong form and the corrected form. For rule pages, examples should show the pattern, the repair, and the reason a second option may or may not work. For hub pages, examples should help the reader choose the next specific article to read.

Review and Accuracy Standards

Rules are written in plain English and checked against the actual examples on the page.
Context-dependent issues are labeled as suggestions, preferences, or style choices when the rule is not absolute.
Pages avoid claims such as reliable accuracy, professional-editing replacement, or absolute writing promises.
Internal links should help users learn the next useful topic, not repeat unrelated SEO links.
Metadata, canonical URLs, structured data, sitemap entries, and redirects are validated before release.

Content Review Criteria

Criterion	What We Check	Why It Matters
Direct answer	The page answers the main grammar question near the top.	Readers should not dig through filler before learning the rule.
Original examples	Examples are written for the page and tied to real writing contexts.	Original examples make a guide more useful than a copied definition.
Wrong/correct/why	Common mistakes explain the incorrect form, corrected form, and reason.	Readers learn how to repair similar sentences later.
Limitations	Style choices, exceptions, and context-dependent guidance are labeled.	Grammar advice is more trustworthy when it does not overclaim.
Site integrity	Canonical URLs, `.html` links, schema markup, and sitemap state are validated before release.	Technical consistency protects search indexing and ensures readers always reach the correct page.

How Tool Suggestions Are Treated

The grammar checker and AI Polish features provide suggestions. They can help find common issues, but they cannot fully judge audience, intent, citation rules, legal meaning, or company style. Users should review suggestions in context before accepting them.

Published learning content should not simply repeat tool output. If the checker highlights a sentence, the article should explain the rule in human terms, show why the correction works, and identify cases where the suggestion may not apply. This keeps the Learn section educational rather than a list of automated messages.

Corrections and Updates

If a page is unclear or wrong, we update the explanation, examples, related links, or metadata. To report an issue, send the URL, the sentence or section, and the reason it looks incorrect through the contact page. We also review older pages for thin explanations, repeated examples, outdated claims, and weak links to the checker workflow.

Updates may include expanding a thin article, adding a missing FAQ, replacing generic examples, correcting a schema date, removing stale claims, or keeping a weak page noindex until it can be rewritten. We prefer fewer indexable pages with stronger explanations over a large surface of thin pages.

Advertising and Independence

Grammarlyzer may display advertising to support the free checker. Ads do not determine grammar rules, example choices, article conclusions, or whether a page is corrected. Advertising and analytics disclosures are maintained in the privacy policy.

Correction Workflow

When a correction request arrives, we first identify whether the issue is factual, stylistic, contextual, technical, or only a preference. Factual grammar errors and broken links are fixed directly. Context-sensitive issues are rewritten to explain the condition more clearly, especially when a rule depends on audience, dialect, citation style, or formal register.

We do not claim individual academic credentials on pages unless they can be stated plainly and verified. The site presents practical grammar guidance, not legal, academic, immigration, medical, or professional editing advice.

How Content Is Created (Human and AI)

Our grammar guides are written and reviewed by human editors. We do not auto-generate published article content with AI writing tools and post it without review. AI may assist a human editor with drafting suggestions or first-pass research, but every published guide is checked, corrected, and approved by a person against the standards on this page before it goes live.

The AI Polish feature is a separate, user-facing tool: it rewrites a reader's own draft only when they request it. Its output is never treated as automatic editorial authority for the learning pages. Examples on a guide are checked against the rule they teach and rewritten when they are vague, misleading, or too generic.

How Ads Are Kept Separate

Advertising support does not influence the answer on a grammar page, the examples chosen for a lesson, or whether a correction is accepted. Ads and analytics are disclosed through the privacy policy. Ads do not appear on our demo or utility pages.