Author and Reviewer Guidelines
These guidelines explain how writers, editors, and reviewers should create trustworthy government-scheme content for government-schemes.org/.
Last updated: June 6, 2026
Purpose of these guidelines
government-schemes.org/ publishes content in a sensitive public-information area. Readers may use our guides to understand welfare benefits, public documents, education support, pensions, subsidies, employment schemes, and other government services. Authors and reviewers must therefore prioritize accuracy, clarity, official-source verification, and reader safety.
Writer responsibilities
- Understand the user intent before writing: apply, eligibility, status, beneficiary list, documents, renewal, correction, login, payment, or download.
- Collect official or reliable sources before drafting important sections.
- Use plain English and explain official terms clearly.
- Include step-by-step guidance where the reader needs to complete a task.
- Avoid exaggerated claims, fake urgency, and guaranteed-benefit language.
- Warn readers against unofficial agents, OTP sharing, fake links, and sensitive-data misuse where relevant.
- Mark uncertain details for editor review instead of guessing.
Reviewer checklist
Recommended article structure
Not every article needs the exact same sections, but government-scheme guides should usually include the following elements when relevant:
| Section | Purpose |
|---|---|
| Overview | Explain the scheme/service, responsible authority, and who should read the guide. |
| Quick facts | Summarize scheme type, official portal, benefit, application mode, and key caution points. |
| Eligibility | Explain who can apply and what conditions may apply. |
| Benefits | Describe support, payment, subsidy, service, or certificate outcome without overpromising. |
| Documents | List common documents and mention that exact requirements may vary by state or applicant type. |
| Apply online/offline | Provide clear steps and official links where available. |
| Status/check/download | Include task-specific steps for high-intent searches. |
| Common mistakes | Help readers avoid wrong portals, missing documents, spelling mismatch, or incomplete forms. |
| FAQ | Answer real user questions based on the topic. |
Language and tone
Authors should write in clear, respectful English. The reader may be a student, farmer, worker, senior citizen, parent, or first-time internet user. Avoid unnecessary technical language. When official terms are required, explain them simply. Do not shame readers for not understanding government processes.
Handling uncertainty
If a detail is uncertain, state the limitation. It is better to say “confirm on the official portal because deadlines may change” than to guess a date. It is better to link to a verified department homepage than to add a broken or fake direct link. Accuracy and reader trust are more important than making an article look complete.
Prohibited editorial practices
- Creating fake official links, phone numbers, addresses, or deadlines.
- Copying government PDFs or other websites without meaningful explanation or transformation.
- Publishing AI output without human review for factual topics.
- Promising approval, payment, scholarship selection, pension release, or loan sanction.
- Encouraging readers to share OTP, passwords, or private documents with unofficial parties.
- Using misleading titles that do not match page content.