What to know first
Summary
This page explains the editorial standards behind Predict Hub: what belongs on the site, how judgment is applied to prediction market pages, and how errors or outdated recommendations should be corrected.
Trust page
What belongs on the site
Pages should exist because they help readers understand prediction market mechanics, compare platforms, choose tools, or follow practical workflows in a way that remains useful after the first spike of attention.
The site should avoid doorway-style expansion, shallow variable pages, and generic crypto directory behavior that adds little explanatory value.
Trust page
How editorial judgment is used
The site can take a point of view, but that point of view should be anchored to visible reasoning: what matters, what could reverse the conclusion, and why the page exists in the first place.
Strong copy should compress reasoning, not hide logic behind vague authority language.
Trust page
How corrections work
If a page contains a factual error, broken framing, or outdated recommendation that could mislead readers, the page should be corrected rather than quietly ignored.
When a page remains useful but the call has changed, the update should rewrite the recommendation and refresh the visible review note.
Trust page
How monetization is kept in bounds
Referral, signup, or offer-style modules should support the page's decision job rather than dictate the entire thesis of the page.
The editorial goal is not to turn every guide into a disguised landing page. It is to keep comparisons, disclosures, and calls to action subordinate to useful explanation.