EDITORIAL STANDARDS — REVISION 02 · 2026

HOW WE WORK

Solane Quarterly operates under documented editorial principles. This page describes the complete process from article commissioning to publication and post-publication correction — including the sourcing standards, review structure, and vocabulary protocols that govern every piece we publish.

01 — EDITORIAL PRINCIPLES

The Framework

Solane 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.

These principles were established at the founding of the publication and are applied consistently across all issues. They are not aspirational — they describe the actual process that every published article has undergone. The methodology is reviewed annually and amended where the editorial team identifies improvements.

This page is updated when the methodology changes. The current document reflects practices as applied from January 2026. The previous version (Revision 01, 2024) is available on request from the editorial team.

02 — PUBLICATION PROCESS

From Commission to Print

01

Commission

Article topics are proposed by the editorial team or submitted unsolicited by writers. Each proposal is evaluated for relevance to the publication's documented topic areas (sleep hygiene, circadian rhythm, evening routine, bedroom environment, recovery window, morning freshness). Proposals involving product promotion or commercially motivated framing are declined at this stage.

02

Research & Drafting

Writers are expected to source factual claims from published research. Primary sources (peer-reviewed publications, documented longitudinal studies, published institutional findings) are preferred over secondary commentary. Where a finding cannot be traced to a verifiable published source, it is either removed or clearly identified as the writer's own observation.

03

First Editorial Review

The first review is conducted by an editor other than the writer. It covers: factual accuracy against cited sources, vocabulary appropriateness (including exclusion of promotional, overclaiming, or out-of-register language), structural clarity, and length appropriateness for the article's subject scope. Feedback is returned to the writer with specific annotations.

04

Writer Revision

Writers revise in response to editorial notes. Revisions are returned with a response to each annotation — indicating whether the change was made and, where it was not, the writer's reasoning. Unresolved disagreements between writer and editor are adjudicated by the Editor-in-Chief, whose decision is recorded in the article's editorial file.

05

Second Editorial Review

A second editor reviews the revised article, focused on the sections flagged in the first review. The second review is not a comprehensive re-edit — it is a targeted verification that the first review's substantive concerns have been adequately addressed. Where new issues are identified, they are flagged for a further revision round.

06

Publication & Archiving

Approved articles are published with a byline, publication date, and source references. The editorial file — including draft history, review annotations, and the writer's conflict-of-interest declaration — is archived by the editorial team. This archive is available for inspection on request by press or research organisations.

03 — SOURCE STANDARDS

What We Cite

Stack of open research publications and academic journals on a desk with a reading lamp, controlled workspace lighting

Peer-Reviewed Sleep Research

Published studies on sleep quality, circadian rhythm, sleep duration, and recovery outcomes. Studies selected must have been published in a named journal and have clear methodology documentation available for review.

Longitudinal Observation Studies

Multi-week and multi-month observational records of sleep behaviour and associated variables. The editorial team notes the observation period, participant count, and any declared limitations when citing these sources.

Published Institutional Findings

Reports and findings from named research institutions, provided that the institution is identifiable and the publication is traceable. The editorial team does not treat institutional authority as a substitute for documented methodology.

Writer Observation (Clearly Labelled)

Personal observation or experiential reporting is permitted in Solane Quarterly but must be clearly identified as such. The phrase "in the writer's observation" or equivalent is required. Observed claims are not conflated with sourced research.

04 — VOCABULARY PROTOCOL

How We Use Language

APPROVED REGISTER

Observational language: "documented in published research", "noted in longitudinal studies"
Qualified claims: "associated with", "correlates with", "observed alongside"
Process descriptions: "sleep hygiene", "wind-down sequence", "rest cycle", "recovery window"
Environmental vocabulary: "bedroom setup", "light exposure", "temperature control"
Independent verification language: "independently tested", "third-party verified"

OUT-OF-REGISTER LANGUAGE

Overclaiming verbs: "reverses", "eliminates", "guarantees", "permanently resolves"
Prescriptive framing: "you must", "everyone should", "the only way to"
Commercial signals: "proprietary blend", "patent-pending formula", "exclusive method"
Unsubstantiated urgency: "before it's too late", "while you still can", "act now"
Promotional register: "game-changing", "revolutionary", "life-transforming"

05 — CORRECTION POLICY

When Errors Occur

The correction policy is designed to maintain trust. Errors are a consequence of the limits of editorial process — the policy is intended to address them transparently rather than conceal them.

Identifying an Error

Errors may be reported by readers via the contact form on the Contact page, by writers who identify post-publication errors in their own work, or by the editorial team during routine review. All reports are reviewed by an editor not involved in the original publication.

Verification Process

The reviewing editor traces the original claim to its cited source and compares the article's representation of that source with its actual content. If the representation is found to be inaccurate, the error is confirmed. If the source is found to support the claim as written, the reporter is informed of this finding with documentation.

Public Amendment

Confirmed errors are corrected in the article text. The original erroneous text is not silently deleted — instead, a clearly marked correction note is appended at the base of the article identifying the specific claim, the original text, the corrected text, and the date of amendment.

Systemic Review

If a correction reveals a systemic issue in how a category of sources has been handled, the editorial team conducts a targeted review of other articles citing similar sources. Findings from this review are recorded in the methodology archive and may prompt updates to the published standards described on this page.

06 — INDEPENDENCE

Commercial Independence

Solane Quarterly is an independent editorial publication focused on everyday wellness practices. The publication is not affiliated with any commercial, governmental, or institutional body.

The publication does not accept advertising in the topic areas it covers. It does not enter into sponsored content arrangements, affiliate marketing relationships, or commissioned review programmes with product manufacturers or distributors active in the sleep and recovery sector.

Writers are required to declare any commercial relationships — including advisory, consultancy, testing, or ambassador arrangements — with organisations relevant to the article they are submitting. Declarations are published with the article where a relationship is disclosed.

The publication is funded through a combination of reader contributions, editorial licensing, and independent content partnerships in areas unrelated to the editorial content. Funders have no influence over article selection, editorial review outcomes, or correction decisions.

The Editor-in-Chief holds full and final authority over all publication decisions. This authority is not delegated to funders, external advisors, or institutional partners under any arrangement.

CONTACT FOR TRANSPARENCY ENQUIRIES

Press, research organisations, or readers with enquiries about the publication's independence, funding, or editorial process may contact the editorial team directly at [email protected].

07 — READER NOTICE

Articles published on Solane Quarterly 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.