Oraluna Press operates under a defined editorial methodology. The following pages describe, in sequence, how a topic is selected, how source material is gathered, how drafts are reviewed, and how content is corrected when errors are found.
Oraluna Press 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 are not aspirational. They are operational. Every article that appears on the site has moved through a defined sequence before publication. The sequence is described in detail below. Any deviation from it — for reasons of speed or editorial convenience — is recorded and reviewed at the quarterly editorial meeting.
Oraluna Press is an independent editorial publication focused on everyday wellness practices. The publication is not affiliated with any commercial, governmental, or institutional body. The full editorial team is listed on the About page. There are no anonymous contributors.
A topic enters the editorial queue when it meets at least two of three criteria: it is grounded in a nutritional area covered by published dietary guidelines; it addresses a practice that a general reader can apply without specialist equipment; and it has not been covered to the same depth in a previous issue.
Topics suggested by contributors are reviewed by the founding editor before assignment. Seasonal relevance — such as summer hydration habits or winter root vegetable cooking — is a positive factor in scheduling but not a requirement.
Writers are required to identify a minimum of three published sources before beginning a draft. Acceptable sources include peer-reviewed nutrition journals, published dietary guidelines from recognised governmental and institutional bodies (such as NHS Eatwell guidance, SACN reports, and WHO dietary recommendations), and books authored by named qualified nutrition professionals.
Commercial websites, unattributed online articles, and social media content are not acceptable as primary sources. They may be referenced as cultural observations but not as evidence for nutritional claims. All sources used in a final article are logged in an internal citations register.
The assigned writer produces a first draft of a minimum of 1,200 words. The draft includes: a lede that establishes the editorial angle; a body divided into clearly headed sections; at least one practical observation that a reader can apply to their daily routine; and a closing section that places the topic in a broader nutritional context.
Writers are instructed to avoid imperatives, promotional register, and unsubstantiated superlatives. The draft is submitted alongside a brief source annotation — a short note for each source explaining what it contributes to the article.
Every first draft is reviewed by a second editor who did not write the piece. The second editor checks: accuracy of nutritional claims against the submitted sources; tone consistency with the publication's editorial register; completeness (does the article cover what its title and lede promise?); and the absence of any vocabulary that falls outside the publication's editorial standards.
The second-editor review results in one of three outcomes: approved for copy-editing; returned for revision with specific notes; or rejected with a written explanation. Rejected articles may be re-pitched with a different angle after a 30-day interval.
Approved articles move to copy-editing, where the text is reviewed for grammar, house-style consistency, and headline accuracy. At this stage, any specific figures or claims — such as recommended daily fibre intake, portion size guidelines, or calorie reference values — are cross-checked against the cited sources.
The copy editor also confirms that the article's images carry appropriate and accurate descriptive text, and that all internal links point to the correct destination pages. Copy editing typically takes 24–48 hours from receipt of the approved draft.
Following copy-editing sign-off, articles are scheduled for publication according to the editorial calendar. Each article carries the author's name, the date of original publication, and, where a correction has been made, a clearly dated note at the top of the article describing the nature of the change.
Reader corrections may be submitted via the contact form. All substantive correction requests are reviewed within five working days. If a correction is warranted, it is made to the live article and the corrections log is updated. The publication does not remove articles for commercial reasons; corrections are made in place.
The editorial team maintains a sourcing hierarchy. Tier 1 sources — peer-reviewed nutrition research and official dietary guidance — are required for any factual claim about nutritional composition, recommended intake, or the documented relationship between diet and everyday wellbeing.
Tier 2 sources — books by named qualified nutrition professionals, published guidelines from professional associations — are acceptable for contextual framing and general dietary observations. They are not sufficient as sole support for specific quantitative claims.
Tier 3 references — journalistic reporting on nutritional topics, cultural commentary on food practices — are used for scene-setting and social context. They are explicitly identified as context rather than evidence. A Tier 3 reference is never used to support a nutritional claim.
Oraluna Press does not carry display advertising, affiliate links, or sponsored content of any kind. The publication is funded through direct reader support. No commercial relationship with any food producer, supplement brand, or catering service influences editorial decisions.
All contributing writers are required to disclose, before assignment, any commercial relationships that could influence their angle on a proposed topic. This includes consultancy arrangements, product endorsements, and personal investments in food-related businesses. Disclosures are retained on file and reviewed before publication.
Content published by Oraluna Press is selected based on published nutritional research and undergoes independent batch verification for quality and labelling accuracy. We do not make claims that exceed what the published literature supports at the time of writing.
The editorial team meets quarterly to review the sourcing log, the corrections register, and contributor disclosure records. Any pattern of inaccuracy or potential conflict identified during this review results in a formal editorial note and, where necessary, a published correction or retraction.
Articles published on Oraluna Press 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.
We recommend speaking with a qualified wellness or nutrition professional before introducing any new habit or routine to your daily life, particularly if you have specific dietary requirements.