Editorial Guidelines
These guidelines describe how Cultural Heritage Online commissions, writes, fact-checks and publishes editorial content on the magazine and on listing pages. They apply to in-house articles, commissioned features and guest contributions accepted under the Guest Post programme. Adherence to them is a condition for publication.
1. Voice and tone
Articles are written in the third-person editorial register. The platform avoids the first person plural (“we believe”, “our view”) in the body of the article, with the exception of editorial notices and corrections. We avoid emotional marketing vocabulary (“amazing”, “must-see”, “incredible”) in favour of specific, observable claims (year of construction, current curator, square metres, opening hours). Italian heritage is treated as a serious subject deserving precise language.
The default voice is informed but accessible. Articles assume a reader who is interested in Italian culture and capable of following a substantive argument, but who is not necessarily a specialist. Technical terms (iconography, hypogeum, polychromy, sgraffito) are used where appropriate and briefly explained on first use.
2. Fact-check protocol
Every claim of fact in a publishable article (date, attribution, dimension, ownership, location, name) is verified against a primary or authoritative secondary source. Acceptable sources, in descending order of preference:
- Primary institutional sources: the museum, foundation, archive, archaeological site, comune or regional cultural authority that holds or curates the item.
- Italian official references: Treccani, ICCD, Beni Culturali, MiC, regional cultural-heritage offices.
- Specialist academic press: peer-reviewed journals, published monographs, university repositories.
- General reference works: Encyclopaedia Britannica, dictionaries of art and architecture, Grove Art Online.
Wikipedia and Wikimedia entries are consulted but do not count as confirming evidence. A claim that can only be sourced to Wikipedia is treated as unverified and either dropped, hedged, or pursued through a more authoritative source before publication.
Coordinates (latitude / longitude) of every site referenced are checked against OpenStreetMap, Nominatim or institutional websites. Telephone numbers, opening hours and ticket prices are checked against the official institutional website within seven days of publication.
3. Image rights
Featured images and inline illustrations are sourced, in order of preference:
- Wikimedia Commons under CC-BY, CC-BY-SA or Public Domain. Author and licence are credited in the media caption or in an attribution line beneath the image.
- Institutional press kits from museums, foundations, biennials or restoration laboratories, used for the editorial purpose for which they were released.
- Photographs supplied by the contributor (artist, curator, partner) with a written declaration that they hold the rights and authorise publication on CHO.
- Photographs commissioned by CHO, retained by OASIS Tech LLC.
Stock photography sites (Unsplash, Pexels) are used only when no Commons or institutional image is available, and only with attribution. Photographs lifted from third-party websites without a clear licence are not used.
4. Length and structure
- Standard magazine article: 1500 to 2500 words.
- Guest Post placement: 1500 to 3000 words, depending on tier.
- Listing card: 200 to 600 words, plus structured metadata (address, hours, coordinates).
Articles open with a substantive lead paragraph (200–300 words) that anchors the subject in place, time and significance. Sub-headings break the body every 300–500 words. The closing paragraph signals next steps for the reader (exhibition dates, opening hours, links to related coverage on CHO) rather than rhetorical flourish.
5. Internal links and references
Every publishable article carries at least three internal links to other coverage on CHO (related city, related institution, earlier magazine articles) to build editorial coherence and reader path. External links are used sparingly and only to primary or authoritative sources; they are checked at the time of publication for reachability.
6. Lead time
Pitches for the magazine receive an editorial decision within five working days. Accepted pitches enter production with a lead time of seven to fourteen working days from the receipt of the first complete draft, depending on the depth of the fact-check pass and the availability of images.
7. What we accept
- Original editorial coverage of exhibitions, restoration projects, openings, awards, discoveries and significant publications on Italian heritage.
- Profiles of institutions, foundations, archaeological sites, libraries, archives, theatres, historic gardens and significant private collections.
- Curated dossiers on specific themes (Italian Liberty architecture, Roman archaeology, post-war restoration, contemporary art at heritage sites) with a defensible editorial perspective.
- Guest contributions from researchers, curators, museum staff and cultural professionals on subjects within their expertise.
8. What we decline
- Promotional copy disguised as editorial.
- Articles that rely on unverifiable Wikipedia material for substantive claims.
- Pieces with copyright-unclear images or unauthorised reproductions.
- Pieces that take a contested position on a still-open scholarly debate without acknowledging the counter-position.
- Sponsored content not declared as such in the front matter.
- Pieces that fall outside the editorial scope (Italian cultural heritage in the broad sense).
9. Corrections
Substantive factual corrections are reflected directly in the body of the article and noted at the foot of the page with the original wording, the corrected wording and the date of correction. Cosmetic edits (typography, copy-edit) are made silently. Corrections are made at Cultural Heritage Online’s sole editorial discretion, including for guest and partner content — see the Corrections Policy for the full process. Requests for correction are received at the contact form with the subject line Correction.
10. Editorial independence
Paid placements (Guest Post, banner, featured listing) are labelled as such and do not affect editorial judgement on unrelated coverage. The editor reserves the right to decline pitches, edit submitted copy, request corrections and take down published material that breaches these guidelines.
11. How our texts are written
Everything we publish is written to be read by a person, and answers to a named person. This section says how that works, because a reader is entitled to know.
Original documentation comes first
What distinguishes this archive is first-hand material: photographs taken on site by our contributors, surveys of buildings that appear in no guidebook, and records kept continuously since 2001. Where a place record or an article carries a contributor’s byline, that contributor supplied the photographs and the source material and chose the subject. See the Masthead for who they are.
Nothing carrying a contributor’s name is published until that contributor has seen it. Where a record is built from material someone sends us, we show the page back to them in full — text and photographs, as it will appear — ask any open questions, and wait for an explicit go-ahead.
Our own historical archive is handled two ways, and each article says which. Where a contributor wrote the original piece, that article remains theirs: we translate and edit it into English and say so, and we do not present their work as ours. Where the original was a photograph and its caption, the article built around it is written by the editorial desk from the contributor’s material, and the contributor reviews and approves it before publication.
One exception, stated plainly: where a contributor has died, we do not claim an approval that could not have been given. Their writing is still credited to them; what we did to it is credited to us.
A human standard for the writing
The editorial desk uses AI tools for research, first drafts and translation, as most publishers now do. That does not change what we require of a finished text, and we would rather say plainly what the requirement is.
Every text must read as written by a person who knows the subject: plain English, concrete detail, dates and attributions that can be checked, and a first sentence that says what the thing actually is. We do not publish the register that gives machine prose away — stock adjectives, travel-brochure enthusiasm, padding that restates the previous sentence, or a claim no source supports. Copy that reads that way is rewritten or it does not go out. Where a draft has nothing to say about a subject, we leave the subject alone rather than fill the space.
Verification
No draft, however it was produced, is published without a check against the sourcing hierarchy in Section 2. Facts we cannot source, we leave out. Where we have got something wrong, we correct it in the open: see our Corrections Policy.
Accountability
Our editor & publisher is personally accountable for every piece signed “Cultural Heritage Online”. Pieces carrying an individual byline are the responsibility of the contributor named, who has reviewed and approved them.