Editorial methodology

How career guidance is produced.

Our standard is usefulness with traceability: role-specific guidance, direct links to primary occupational sources, clear limitations, and no invented expert review.

Research hierarchy

We prefer O*NET for occupational tasks, work context, interests, and preparation; the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Outlook Handbook for training, work environment, pay, and outlook; and official licensing or regulatory bodies for controlled professions.

Drafting and review

Career records are structured before they are rendered into pages. AI may assist with drafting and consistency. A human product review checks the page structure, claims, source links, and tone before publication. This is editorial review, not professional counseling or legal review.

Facts versus reflection

Current facts such as licensing, education, pay, and outlook should be verified at the linked source. Fit signals and investigation questions are reflective guidance, not empirical predictions about an individual.

Update policy

Pages carry a reviewed date. High-consequence facts should be rechecked before substantive updates and periodically as source agencies publish new information. A changed date must correspond to a real review.

Expansion rule

We do not create a separate page merely because a keyword variation exists. A new indexable URL must answer a distinct question and contain enough specific information to satisfy it.