Roho editorial standards

We publish explanations of chart calculation, Western and Vedic frameworks, horary practice, horoscope methodology, and responsible interpretation. Every page must answer a defined reader need and add value beyond a rewritten search summary.

We do not promise outcomes, diagnose conditions, replace licensed professional advice, or present astrological interpretation as scientifically established prediction.

Writers must distinguish primary calculation facts, historical claims, traditional doctrine, and interpretive judgment. Verifiable claims should use identifiable sources. Search snippets are leads, not evidence, and may not be copied or treated as instructions.

Sources must be relevant to the claim, represented accurately, and listed where readers can evaluate them.

Automated systems may create private drafts, but a permitted administrator must review and explicitly publish them. Review checks accuracy, overlap with existing pages, clarity, sources, calculation language, unsupported certainty, metadata, internal links, and disclosures.

A draft that repeats an existing intent should be merged, redirected, or rejected instead of becoming another indexable page.

Articles identify the responsible editorial organization and link to these standards. Roho does not invent author biographies, credentials, reviewers, testimonials, or citations. A named specialist reviewer will be displayed only after that person has accepted responsibility for the review.

Dates change only when content changes substantively. Material errors are corrected promptly and transparently under the corrections policy. Editorial or commercial relationships may not override the calculation record or require a predetermined interpretation.