Editorial Policy

Editorial review and responsible astrology

Who is responsible for a page, how AI assistance is reviewed, and which claims we will not publish.Our goal is clear, useful astrology content with visible limits. We avoid fear-based certainty, fabricated authority, and advice that substitutes for professional care.Last updated · 2026-08-24

Who, how, and why

Public articles identify an author or the AstroMaster editorial team, a publication date, and a revision date when material changes are made. The page should explain its purpose and link to the relevant calculation or source policy.

Who: a named contributor or accountable editorial organization.
How: calculation, source research, editorial drafting, and any AI assistance.
Why: education, reflection, or explaining a tool—not manipulating search rankings.

Review checklist

Before publication, editors check terminology, internal consistency, source-role labels, links, dates, uncertainty, and the difference between chart facts and interpretation.

No guaranteed outcomes or fabricated precision.
No medical, legal, financial, or mental-health diagnosis.
No claim that a chart removes personal agency or consent.
No invented source, author credential, testimonial, or data record.

AI assistance

AI may support outlining, translation, consistency checks, or draft wording. A human-defined method, validated structured data, and editorial review remain required for published authority content.

AI is not listed as the expert source.
Automated forecasts must be anchored to actual calculated sky data.
Large-scale pages must add real user value and are monitored for repetition or factual drift.

Sensitive topics

Astrology can be used as a prompt for reflection, not as a substitute for emergency help or qualified advice. Content involving health, money, law, abuse, self-harm, or personal safety uses stronger boundaries and referral language.