Arden Quarterly
Editorial Standards

How We Verify

Arden Quarterly operates under clearly defined editorial principles: every article is reviewed before publication, sources are documented, corrections are recorded, and commercial interests are always disclosed.

2
Editor Reviews
Every article is reviewed by a second editor before publication.
0
Undisclosed Affiliates
Commercial relationships are always declared when relevant.
Corrections Record
Factual corrections remain visible in the published record.
01

Editorial Principles

Arden Quarterly 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.

Arden Quarterly is an independent editorial publication. Articles reflect the considered observations of contributing writers and editors. The publication is not affiliated with any organisation operating in personal wellbeing, nutrition, or related industries, nor with any governmental or regulatory body.

The publication does not accept paid placement, sponsored content presented as editorial, or native advertising of any kind. Where affiliate links are used, they are disclosed in the body of the article. Editorial selection is never influenced by commercial considerations.

02

Sourcing Standards

Articles in Arden Quarterly reference published research from peer-reviewed journals and reputable institutional sources. Editorial selection prioritises long-running studies and replicated findings. We do not cite single unpublished studies as the basis for general claims.

Acceptable Sources
  • Peer-reviewed journal articles from recognised publishers
  • Systematic reviews and meta-analyses
  • Published guidance from national public bodies (e.g. NHS, NICE)
  • Reports from established research institutions
  • First-hand expert correspondence (named and attributed)
Not Used as Primary Sources
  • Press releases from commercial organisations
  • Social media posts or personal blogs
  • Preprints without subsequent peer review
  • Single observational studies used to make broad claims
  • Anonymised expert opinions
03

Fact-Checking Process

Every article published in Arden Quarterly passes through a four-stage review before it appears on the site. The stages are carried out by different members of the editorial team to prevent confirmation bias.

1
Writer Self-Review

The contributing writer verifies all factual claims against primary sources before submission. Any referenced research is linked or filed with the editorial record. Anecdotal observations are clearly labelled as such.

2
Editorial Desk Review

The commissioning editor reads the piece against the source list. Unsupported generalisations are returned to the writer for revision. Claims that cannot be sourced are removed. Tone is checked against the publication's register.

3
Second-Editor Pass

A second editor, who was not involved in commissioning or drafting, reads the final version. This pass focuses on accuracy, clarity, and the appropriate use of research references. Their approval is required before publication.

4
Post-Publication Monitoring

Readers may submit correction requests via the contact form. The editorial team reviews each request within five working days. Where a correction is warranted, it is applied to the article and noted in a visible correction statement at the end of the piece.

04

Corrections Policy

Arden Quarterly is committed to accuracy. When errors are identified — whether by a reader, a writer, or an editor — we correct them promptly and transparently. We do not delete or silently edit published articles to hide inaccuracies.

Minor corrections (spelling, formatting, broken links) are made without a public notice unless the error was present for more than 24 hours after publication.

Substantive corrections — those that alter the meaning, accuracy, or conclusions of an article — are made with a dated correction note at the end of the article. The note states what was originally published and what has changed. The original version is not retained in the live article, but the correction record is.

To submit a correction request, please write to [email protected] with the subject line “Correction Request” and a link to the article concerned.

05

Transparency Statement

Arden Quarterly is independently operated. We do not have investors, sponsors, or parent organisations whose interests might shape editorial decisions. Below is a summary of our current commercial arrangements:

Advertising

We do not carry display advertising or sponsored content units on any page of the publication.

Affiliate Links

Some articles contain affiliate links. These are always disclosed at the start of the article with the notation “This article contains affiliate links.”

Commissioned Content

All articles are commissioned by Arden Quarterly editors. No article has been commissioned by or written on behalf of an external commercial party.

The publication's funding model relies on direct reader engagement and occasional licensing of editorial content. No funding relationship influences article selection or editorial judgement.

06

Frequently Asked Questions

07

Contact the Editorial Team

For enquiries about our editorial process, correction requests, contribution proposals, or licensing questions, please use the contact form or write to the editorial office directly.