Editorial Standards

Three categories

Every analytical page distinguishes the following:

1. Verified facts — sourced from cruise lines, shipyards, classification societies, official deck plans, registries or reputable industry sources. Example: The ship has a guest capacity of 728.
2. Calculated metrics — derived from verified facts via fixed formulas. Generated by @seokone/engine, not typed by an editor. Example: GT per guest = gross tonnage / guest capacity.
3. Editorial interpretation — what the facts and metrics may mean for the reader. Example: This suggests a low-density onboard environment relative to many larger cruise ships.

Byline policy

The default byline for Luxury Ship Index articles is the Luxury Ship Index Research Desk — an editorial Organization, not a single named editor. Specifically:

• No fake individual editors.
• No fake credentials.
• No AI-generated headshots.
• No fabricated LinkedIn profiles.
• No invented maritime careers.

When a real human author is added, every credential, profile link and bio statement must be true and verifiable.

Independence

Luxury Ship Index does not sell cruises. For the first 12 months after launch the visible commitments are: no affiliate links, no booking call-to-actions, no quote-request forms, no advisor lead generation, no sponsored rankings and no paid placement. Future monetisation is allowed only when it does not create a conflict with rankings, scores or coverage decisions — see the source policy for adjacent rules and the about page for the full position.

AI policy

AI tools may be used for:

• drafting structure;
• summarising source material;
• proposing article outlines;
• rewriting for clarity;
• generating first-pass plain-English explanations.

AI must not:

• be cited as a factual source;
• generate final numbers, ratios or scores;
• produce calculated metrics that are not derived from the canonical database via the engine.

Fact-check gate

No generated article may be published unless it passes the automated fact-check gate. The gate runs at build time and:

1. extracts every numeric and technical claim from the generated text;
2. compares verified facts against the canonical ship database;
3. recomputes calculated metrics from source fields;
4. compares recomputed metrics against the article body, tables and JSON-LD;
5. fails the build if mismatches exceed a documented tolerance;
6. requires source notes for every material specification.

Build-fail examples:

• Article says 556 crew, database says 544.
• Article says GT per guest is 78.2; the engine returns 75.1.
• Article claims LNG propulsion, but the database fuel_type is null.
• Score table and JSON-LD @graph disagree.
• Source URL missing for gross tonnage.

Opinion policy

Strong conclusions are allowed when data supports them. Preferred phrasing:

• “Best suited for…”
• “Less suited for…”
• “The data suggests…”
• “Compared with similar ships…”
• “This is less compelling for travellers who…”

Avoid: objectively the best, guaranteed, perfect for everyone, ultimate, luxury beyond compare.

Data conflicts

If sources disagree:

1. Prefer the official cruise line, shipyard or classification source.
2. Note the discrepancy if material.
3. Do not average conflicting figures.
4. Mark the relevant field as needing verification.
5. Reduce the data confidence rating if the conflict affects interpretation.