The short answer
Readers get six questions covering authority, necessity, account type, data use, retention, sharing, and whether a safer synthetic or redacted version will do.
The decision standard is simple: preserve the source, state the limits, and make the next human check obvious. A useful article should reduce uncertainty without pretending that every unknown has been resolved.
What to examine
A document can contain customer details, health information, contracts, children’s data, passwords, location, or facts about people who never agreed to the upload.
Start with scope. Identify the product, account, audience, jurisdiction, data, and decision involved. Then separate what was directly observed from what a vendor, researcher, regulator, or commentator says. Record dates because AI products, access rules, and prices change quickly.
Deleting a chat may not answer every question about backups, audit logs, connected tools, or vendor retention. Check the current product terms.
A practical way to do it
- Identify every person and sensitive field in the file.
- Remove or replace anything not needed for the task.
- Use an approved account and verify retention and deletion controls.
Keep the worksheet or test record with the draft. If another editor cannot reproduce the check from the saved evidence, the article is not ready.
Editorial guardrail
Do not fill a missing fact with a plausible sentence. Mark it as unknown, find a stronger source, narrow the claim, or remove it. Commentary belongs in a clearly labeled paragraph after the reported facts, not inside them.
Primary-source reading list
These are starting points, not automatic support for every sentence. The publishing editor must open each cited page and confirm the claim it supports on the day of review.
Bottom line
Readers get six questions covering authority, necessity, account type, data use, retention, sharing, and whether a safer synthetic or redacted version will do.