Darlev Notebook
Editorial Standards

How We Verify and Publish.

Darlev Notebook 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.

Principles
01

Editorial Foundation

Darlev Notebook is an independent editorial publication. Articles reflect the considered observations of contributing writers and editors. The publication is not affiliated with any commercial food brand, nutritional product company, or governmental body.

The editorial position of this publication is defined by a commitment to observational accuracy over aspiration. We document what actually happens in everyday food life — the recurring patterns, the seasonal adjustments, the variations across a week — rather than what ought to happen according to any instructive framework.

Articles in Darlev Notebook 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.

01

Subject Selection

Subjects are selected based on recurring observational patterns — not trending topics, not commercially motivated categories. The question asked is: what is actually happening in everyday food life that deserves careful attention?

02

Research & Sourcing

Articles reference published research from peer-reviewed journals and reputable institutional sources. Preference is given to long-running studies and replicated findings over single-study claims or preliminary data.

03

Editorial Review

Every article is reviewed by at least one editor other than the author before publication. Review focuses on the accuracy of claims made, the appropriateness of the register used, and the relevance and quality of sources cited.

04

Publication

Articles are published with a full byline, publication date, and estimated reading time. The editorial record is maintained: all published versions, including revised versions following corrections, are documented.

Standards
02

Sourcing Standards

Articles in Darlev Notebook reference published research from peer-reviewed journals and reputable institutional sources. Editorial selection prioritises long-running studies and replicated findings. The publication distinguishes between claims supported by a substantial body of literature and those based on single studies or preliminary research — and this distinction is reflected in the language used.

When a writer references a specific study or source, the editorial team retains the original reference and can supply it on request via the contact form. We do not link to research directly in published articles, as linking practices require ongoing maintenance that a small publication cannot reliably sustain.

Approved Sources
  • Peer-reviewed academic journals
  • Government nutritional guidelines (UK, EU, WHO)
  • University research publications
  • Long-running longitudinal food studies
  • Replicated findings across multiple studies
Regarded with Caution
  • Single-study preliminary findings
  • Industry-funded nutrition research
  • Observational studies without replication
  • Small sample size studies
  • Pre-print research not yet peer-reviewed
Not Used
  • Commercial product testimonials
  • Social media wellness content
  • Unattributed online claims
  • Promotional nutritional literature
  • Anecdotal claims without documentation
Verification
03

Fact-Checking Process

Each article passes through a two-stage review before publication. The first stage is conducted by the author: claims are checked against sources before the draft is submitted. The second stage is conducted by an editor who did not write the piece: a fresh read focused specifically on claim accuracy, sourcing quality, and register appropriateness.

For articles that reference specific findings from published research, the editor checks that the claim accurately represents the finding — that it does not overstate the evidence, generalise beyond the study population, or omit relevant caveats mentioned in the source.

We recommend speaking with a qualified wellness or nutrition professional before introducing any new habit, food choice, or physical routine, particularly if you have specific dietary requirements or are taking structured supplements. The publication's editorial content is observational in nature and does not constitute professional guidance.

Two-Stage Review Checklist
Author Review
  • Every factual claim traced to a source
  • Source quality assessed before use
  • No unsupported generalisations
  • Commercial relationships disclosed
  • Editorial register maintained throughout
Editor Review
  • Independent check of all factual claims
  • Source quality independently verified
  • Claims not overstating evidence
  • Register consistent with publication standards
  • Reader notice present where required
Accuracy
04

Corrections Policy

Corrections are noted publicly in the article record, with a brief explanation of what was revised and when. The original version is archived, not removed. The publication considers transparency about its own errors to be a necessary part of the editorial record — not a failure to be minimised.

Correction requests from readers are reviewed by the lead editor within ten working days. If a correction is verified, it is applied promptly. If a correction request is not verified — if the published claim is found to be accurate — the reader receives a response explaining the decision and, where possible, the source that supports the published version.

To submit a correction request, use the contact form on the Contact page with the subject "Correction request". Include the article title, the specific passage, and your proposed correction with supporting sources where available.

Independence
05

Transparency Statement

Darlev Notebook is an independent editorial publication. Articles reflect the considered observations of contributing writers and editors. The publication is not affiliated with any commercial food or wellness organisation, and does not accept advertising from food-industry sources.

Some articles may include links to external resources. Darlev Notebook does not endorse the content of external sites and is not responsible for the accuracy of material published elsewhere. External links are included for reference only, at the writer's or editor's discretion.

Some links included in articles may be affiliate links. Where this is the case, it does not affect the editorial selection of subject matter or the assessment of the material discussed. Writers are required to disclose affiliate relationships at the point of submission.

What we do
  • Commission observational, editorial content
  • Review claims against peer-reviewed research
  • Publish corrections transparently
  • Require disclosure of commercial relationships
  • Maintain an archived editorial record
What we do not do
  • Accept advertising from food-industry sources
  • Publish promotional or sponsored content
  • Make outcome promises to readers
  • Delete corrections from the record
  • Endorse products or commercial services
Open editorial notebook with handwritten source notes and reference markers on a wooden desk under consistent studio lighting
Stack of academic journals and research papers arranged on a pale surface in a quiet editorial office in natural daylight
Standards Questions

Questions about our editorial process