Right to Information Wiki

Quarterly Editorial Audit — Top-30 Pages

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Sun, 03 May 2026 08:32:41 +0000

2026/05/03 11:03	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(rti wiki quarterly audit,editorial audit process,rti wiki review schedule,content audit process 2026)&metatag-description=(Quarterly editorial audit schedule for RTI Wiki — which top-30 pages are reviewed when, who reviews, and what counts as a pass.)}}
	+
	+	====== Quarterly Editorial Audit — Top-30 Pages ======
	+
	+	{{page>_snippets:dpdp-banner}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	Every quarter, RTI Wiki audits its top-30 most-visited pages. The audit confirms that statutory citations are current, case law has not been overturned, amendments are reflected, and internal links resolve. The findings are published on this page; page-level corrections are committed within 10 working days of the audit.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+
	+
	+	Quarterly editorial audit schedule for RTI Wiki — which top-30 pages are reviewed when, who reviews, and what counts as a pass.
	+
	+	Part of [[:about:editorial-review\|Editorial Review]].
	+
	+	===== What the audit checks =====
	+
	+	Every audited page goes through this 10-point checklist:
	+
	+	- Section citations. Every §N reference points to a section that still exists and has the same meaning.
	+	- Case-law currency. Cited cases have not been overturned; if refined by later judgement, the refinement is noted.
	+	- DPDP 2025 reflection. Pages touching §8(1)(j) carry the post-14-November-2025 framework.
	+	- Fee rates. Central Rs. 10 / state-specific rates match the rule as of audit date.
	+	- Portal URLs. Central and state RTI portals open; any renamed portal is updated.
	+	- First-appeal / second-appeal timelines. 30 days / 90 days references are consistent.
	+	- Broken internal links. All `[[:slug]]` targets resolve to live pages.
	+	- Anchor-text hygiene. No "click here", "read more", or placeholder anchors.
	+	- Schema.org validity. Article, FAQPage, HowTo, and BreadcrumbList schemas are well-formed and match page content.
	+	- Accessibility. All images carry descriptive alt text; H1 is unique; form inputs have labels.
	+
	+	===== Audit cadence =====
	+
	+	* Q1 — January audit. Post-Republic Day; refreshes pages ahead of the tax / result season.
	+	* Q2 — April audit. Post-fiscal-year; catches new state rules; CIC annual report typically releases around this window.
	+	* Q3 — July audit. Mid-monsoon; post-Budget-Session updates to the Act or Rules.
	+	* Q4 — October audit. Post-Navratri; aligns with CIC's anniversary (12 October).
	+
	+	Each audit is completed within a two-week window. The findings and the "Last reviewed" date on audited pages are updated together.
	+
	+	===== The top-30 list =====
	+
	+	Derived from (i) highest internal-link count, (ii) Google Search Console top pages (when available), and (iii) editorial judgement. The list is refreshed each quarter.
	+
	+	==== The enduring core (always audited) ====
	+
	+	- [[:file-rti-online-india\|How to file RTI online]]
	+	- [[:blog:how-to-write-rti-application\|Ask for records, not answers]]
	+	- [[:explanations:grounds-for-rejection\|Grounds for RTI rejection]]
	+	- [[:why-rti-gets-rejected\|Why RTI gets rejected]]
	+	- [[:faq\|RTI FAQ — 25 most-asked questions]]
	+	- [[:faa-first-appeal-timelines\|First Appeal timelines]]
	+	- [[:faa-appellate-review-checklist\|FAA appellate-review checklist]]
	+	- [[:landmark-cic-decisions\|10 landmark CIC decisions]]
	+	- [[:pio-rti-reply-guide\|PIO RTI Reply Guide]]
	+	- [[:pio-faa-knowledge-base\|PIO / FAA knowledge base]]
	+
	+	==== The recipes (rotated) ====
	+
	+	- [[:guide:applicant:application:sample:fir\|FIR sample RTI]]
	+	- [[:rti-for-fir-status\|FIR not registered]]
	+	- [[:rti-for-gst-refund\|GST refund stuck]]
	+	- [[:rti-for-income-tax-refund\|Income-tax refund]]
	+	- [[:rti-for-pm-kisan-installment\|PM-KISAN installment]]
	+	- [[:rti-for-mgnrega-wages\|MGNREGA wages]]
	+	- [[:rti-for-ration-card-cancelled\|Ration card]]
	+	- [[:rti-for-electricity-bill-dispute\|Electricity bill dispute]]
	+	- [[:rti-for-answer-sheet-inspection\|Answer-sheet inspection]]
	+	- [[:rti-for-water-supply-quality\|Water supply quality]]
	+
	+	==== State and tool pages ====
	+
	+	- [[:file-rti-in-maharashtra\|Maharashtra]]
	+	- [[:file-rti-in-uttar-pradesh\|Uttar Pradesh]]
	+	- [[:file-rti-in-delhi\|Delhi]]
	+	- [[:file-rti-in-tamil-nadu\|Tamil Nadu]]
	+	- [[:file-rti-in-karnataka\|Karnataka]]
	+	- [[:tools:generator\|RTI Application Generator]]
	+	- [[:tools:first-appeal\|First Appeal Builder]]
	+	- [[:tools:pio-reply-checker\|PIO Reply Checker]]
	+	- [[:tools:chat\|RTI Wiki AI]]
	+	- [[:tools:question-builder\|Question Builder]]
	+
	+	===== Recent audits =====
	+
	+	* Q2 2026 (April) — First quarterly audit since the schedule was formalised. Top-30 baseline captured. DPDP 2025 amendment to §8(1)(j) propagated to all affected pages. No case overturned in the review window.
	+	* Q3 2026 (July) — scheduled.
	+
	+	===== How readers help =====
	+
	+	* Spot a stale citation? Report via [[:corrections\|our corrections page]]. Acknowledgement in 24 hours, fix in 48 hours (typical).
	+	* Know a better primary source? Email ''admin@bighelpers.in'' with a link.
	+	* Reviewer interest? See [[:about:editorial-review\|the reviewer onboarding page]].
	+
	+	===== Related pages =====
	+
	+	* [[:about:editorial-review\|Editorial Review — reviewer onboarding]]
	+	* [[:about:editorial-policy\|Editorial Policy]]
	+	* [[:about:web-vitals-audit\|Web Vitals audit baseline]]
	+	* [[:corrections\|Corrections]]
	+	* [[:content-roadmap-implementation\|Implementation plan]] (editorial-internal)
	+
	+	----
	+
	+	//Last reviewed: 21 April 2026.//
	+
	+	{{tag>about editorial-audit quarterly-review process}}

Editorial Review — Reviewer Onboarding

anonymous@undisclosed.example.com (Anonymous) — Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:47:14 +0000

2026/05/03 11:03	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(rti wiki editorial review,retired ic reviewer,rti wiki editorial board,rti content review,editorial process rti)&metatag-description=(RTI Wiki's editorial-review process and how retired Information Commissioners and senior advocates join as reviewers. Scope, commitment, and contact.)}}
	+
	+	====== Editorial Review — Reviewer Onboarding ======
	+
	+	{{page>_snippets:dpdp-banner}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	RTI Wiki is looking for retired Information Commissioners and senior RTI advocates to join our editorial-review panel. The commitment is light (one sitting per quarter, 30-45 minutes). The contribution is decisive — you tighten our factual accuracy and catch errors before citizens rely on them.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Why RTI Wiki reviews content =====
	+
	+	This site is used by citizens filing their first RTI, by Public Information Officers training in their role, and by First Appellate Authorities drafting reasoned orders. A wrong fee rate, a stale case citation, a superseded clause — each can cause a citizen to miss a deadline or a PIO to sign an appealable order.
	+
	+	We already:
	+
	+	* Verify every published article — a green "Verified" badge appears at the top of the page, backed by the entry in ''conf/verified.json''.
	+	* Cite statute and case law — every ground, exemption, and procedural claim links to the Act section and the binding authority.
	+	* Link to primary sources — CIC orders, SC and HC judgements (via India Kanoon or the court's own portal).
	+	* Track last-reviewed date — visible at the bottom of every article; auto-emitted as `dateModified` in the article's schema.org JSON-LD.
	+
	+	What we do not yet have — independent editorial oversight by people who wrote the rulings, drafted the orders, and appeared in the appeals that shape Indian RTI practice. That is what this panel is for.
	+
	+	===== Who we are looking for =====
	+
	+	* Retired Central or State Information Commissioners — any tenure, any jurisdiction.
	+	* Senior RTI advocates — at least ten years of pleaded RTI appeals in the High Courts or the Commissions.
	+	* Retired Public Information Officers at senior rank — Joint Secretary / Commissioner-level, with a substantive RTI docket history.
	+	* Retired Secretaries / Additional Secretaries who administered Section 4 disclosures.
	+	* Academics specialising in transparency law — tenured faculty with published work on the RTI Act or comparative information-rights regimes.
	+
	+	===== What the commitment looks like =====
	+
	+	==== Quarterly sitting ====
	+
	+	* Frequency. Once per quarter (four times a year).
	+	* Duration. 30 to 45 minutes.
	+	* Format. Video call (Zoom / Google Meet) or a written exchange — whichever the reviewer prefers.
	+	* Agenda. The editor brings 5-10 articles that have been updated since the last sitting. The reviewer flags any factual error, stale citation, or tonal issue. The editor takes the note and fixes.
	+
	+	==== Topic-specific review ====
	+
	+	We may also reach out for a single-article review when the article concerns the reviewer's specialism. Example: an article on PIO procedure under Section 7 might be sent to a retired Information Commissioner who decided many §7(8)(i) matters. A single-article review is usually 15-20 minutes, written.
	+
	+	==== No ghostwriting expected ====
	+
	+	Reviewers do not draft content. The editor drafts; the reviewer flags errors or suggests sharper framing. All edits are the editor's responsibility.
	+
	+	===== What reviewers receive =====
	+
	+	* Public acknowledgement. Reviewers are listed on the Editorial Board page with their designation and tenure — opt-out on request.
	+	* A direct line to the editor. Feedback loops are fast; corrections typically go live within 48 hours.
	+	* Citation credit. Articles a reviewer has substantively shaped carry a small footnote: "Reviewed by [Name], former Chief Information Commissioner, [State]."
	+	* Copies of updates. Reviewers receive a quarterly digest of what changed, for their own records.
	+	* No honorarium or fee (the site runs on ad revenue and is not a commercial publication). We offer this as public-interest volunteer work.
	+
	+	===== What RTI Wiki is not =====
	+
	+	* Not a news outlet. We cover the Act, not daily headlines. We archive significant CIC orders and landmark court rulings; we do not report on breaking news.
	+	* Not a litigation service. Our tools (Generator, First Appeal Builder, PIO Reply Checker, Question Builder) assist the citizen to draft their own application or appeal. They do not file on anyone's behalf.
	+	* Not a partisan platform. Reviewers from across the political spectrum are welcome, so long as the feedback is factual and procedural.
	+
	+	===== Our editorial principles =====
	+
	+	- Statute first, case-law second, commentary last. Every claim cites either a section of the Act, a binding judgement, or a published CIC order. Opinion is clearly marked.
	+	- No "why" questions in sample RTIs. We teach citizens to ask for records, not answers. See our drafting guide at [[:blog:how-to-write-rti-application\|Ask for records, not answers]].
	+	- Case-law currency. After every significant SC / HC ruling, we update the relevant articles within a week.
	+	- Plain-language rule. We aim for a ninth-standard reading level on citizen-facing pages. Legal-practitioner pages (PIO framework, FAA checklist) are written for the trained reader.
	+	- DPDP-compliant privacy. We follow the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 and the 2025 Rules. See our [[:privacy-policy\|Privacy Policy]].
	+
	+	===== Our commitment to corrections =====
	+
	+	* Response within 24 hours for any substantive correction notice.
	+	* Fix within 48 hours when the correction is clearly supported by source.
	+	* Credit (on request) in the article's footer: "Correction by [Name], [date]".
	+	* Public changelog. See [[:corrections\|corrections page]] for reporting errors and the SLA.
	+
	+	===== How to join =====
	+
	+	Write to [[mailto:admin@bighelpers.in\|admin@bighelpers.in]] with the subject line "Editorial Review — Interest" and a short note:
	+
	+	* Your role(s) in RTI practice over the last ten years.
	+	* Your specialism (e.g. Section 8 case law, police records, service records, forest rights, scheme-specific).
	+	* Whether you are available for quarterly sittings, single-article reviews, or both.
	+	* Whether you are comfortable with public acknowledgement on the Editorial Board page.
	+
	+	The editor will reply within three working days.
	+
	+	===== Current editorial stack =====
	+
	+	* Editor. Shrawan Pathak. Contact: [[mailto:admin@bighelpers.in\|admin@bighelpers.in]].
	+	* Verified articles. Around 190 pages carry the green "Verified" badge, reflecting editor-level review.
	+	* Review cadence. //Last reviewed// dates are published on every article.
	+	* Editorial calendar. Quarterly reviewer sittings are planned from Q2 2026.
	+
	+	===== Related pages =====
	+
	+	* [[:about:editorial-policy\|Editorial Policy]]
	+	* [[:about:what-is-rti-wiki\|What is RTI Wiki?]]
	+	* [[:corrections\|Report a correction]]
	+	* [[:about:editor\|Editor — Shrawan Pathak]]
	+	* [[:privacy-policy\|Privacy Policy]]
	+
	+	----
	+
	+	//Last reviewed: 21 April 2026.//
	+
	+	{{tag>about editorial-review reviewer-onboarding editorial-board}}

2026/05/03 11:03	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(rti wiki quarterly audit,editorial audit process,rti wiki review schedule,content audit process 2026)&metatag-description=(Quarterly editorial audit schedule for RTI Wiki — which top-30 pages are reviewed when, who reviews, and what counts as a pass.)}}
	+
	+	====== Quarterly Editorial Audit — Top-30 Pages ======
	+
	+	{{page>_snippets:dpdp-banner}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	Every quarter, RTI Wiki audits its top-30 most-visited pages. The audit confirms that statutory citations are current, case law has not been overturned, amendments are reflected, and internal links resolve. The findings are published on this page; page-level corrections are committed within 10 working days of the audit.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+
	+
	+	Quarterly editorial audit schedule for RTI Wiki — which top-30 pages are reviewed when, who reviews, and what counts as a pass.
	+
	+	Part of [[:about:editorial-review\|Editorial Review]].
	+
	+	===== What the audit checks =====
	+
	+	Every audited page goes through this 10-point checklist:
	+
	+	- Section citations. Every §N reference points to a section that still exists and has the same meaning.
	+	- Case-law currency. Cited cases have not been overturned; if refined by later judgement, the refinement is noted.
	+	- DPDP 2025 reflection. Pages touching §8(1)(j) carry the post-14-November-2025 framework.
	+	- Fee rates. Central Rs. 10 / state-specific rates match the rule as of audit date.
	+	- Portal URLs. Central and state RTI portals open; any renamed portal is updated.
	+	- First-appeal / second-appeal timelines. 30 days / 90 days references are consistent.
	+	- Broken internal links. All `[[:slug]]` targets resolve to live pages.
	+	- Anchor-text hygiene. No "click here", "read more", or placeholder anchors.
	+	- Schema.org validity. Article, FAQPage, HowTo, and BreadcrumbList schemas are well-formed and match page content.
	+	- Accessibility. All images carry descriptive alt text; H1 is unique; form inputs have labels.
	+
	+	===== Audit cadence =====
	+
	+	* Q1 — January audit. Post-Republic Day; refreshes pages ahead of the tax / result season.
	+	* Q2 — April audit. Post-fiscal-year; catches new state rules; CIC annual report typically releases around this window.
	+	* Q3 — July audit. Mid-monsoon; post-Budget-Session updates to the Act or Rules.
	+	* Q4 — October audit. Post-Navratri; aligns with CIC's anniversary (12 October).
	+
	+	Each audit is completed within a two-week window. The findings and the "Last reviewed" date on audited pages are updated together.
	+
	+	===== The top-30 list =====
	+
	+	Derived from (i) highest internal-link count, (ii) Google Search Console top pages (when available), and (iii) editorial judgement. The list is refreshed each quarter.
	+
	+	==== The enduring core (always audited) ====
	+
	+	- [[:file-rti-online-india\|How to file RTI online]]
	+	- [[:blog:how-to-write-rti-application\|Ask for records, not answers]]
	+	- [[:explanations:grounds-for-rejection\|Grounds for RTI rejection]]
	+	- [[:why-rti-gets-rejected\|Why RTI gets rejected]]
	+	- [[:faq\|RTI FAQ — 25 most-asked questions]]
	+	- [[:faa-first-appeal-timelines\|First Appeal timelines]]
	+	- [[:faa-appellate-review-checklist\|FAA appellate-review checklist]]
	+	- [[:landmark-cic-decisions\|10 landmark CIC decisions]]
	+	- [[:pio-rti-reply-guide\|PIO RTI Reply Guide]]
	+	- [[:pio-faa-knowledge-base\|PIO / FAA knowledge base]]
	+
	+	==== The recipes (rotated) ====
	+
	+	- [[:guide:applicant:application:sample:fir\|FIR sample RTI]]
	+	- [[:rti-for-fir-status\|FIR not registered]]
	+	- [[:rti-for-gst-refund\|GST refund stuck]]
	+	- [[:rti-for-income-tax-refund\|Income-tax refund]]
	+	- [[:rti-for-pm-kisan-installment\|PM-KISAN installment]]
	+	- [[:rti-for-mgnrega-wages\|MGNREGA wages]]
	+	- [[:rti-for-ration-card-cancelled\|Ration card]]
	+	- [[:rti-for-electricity-bill-dispute\|Electricity bill dispute]]
	+	- [[:rti-for-answer-sheet-inspection\|Answer-sheet inspection]]
	+	- [[:rti-for-water-supply-quality\|Water supply quality]]
	+
	+	==== State and tool pages ====
	+
	+	- [[:file-rti-in-maharashtra\|Maharashtra]]
	+	- [[:file-rti-in-uttar-pradesh\|Uttar Pradesh]]
	+	- [[:file-rti-in-delhi\|Delhi]]
	+	- [[:file-rti-in-tamil-nadu\|Tamil Nadu]]
	+	- [[:file-rti-in-karnataka\|Karnataka]]
	+	- [[:tools:generator\|RTI Application Generator]]
	+	- [[:tools:first-appeal\|First Appeal Builder]]
	+	- [[:tools:pio-reply-checker\|PIO Reply Checker]]
	+	- [[:tools:chat\|RTI Wiki AI]]
	+	- [[:tools:question-builder\|Question Builder]]
	+
	+	===== Recent audits =====
	+
	+	* Q2 2026 (April) — First quarterly audit since the schedule was formalised. Top-30 baseline captured. DPDP 2025 amendment to §8(1)(j) propagated to all affected pages. No case overturned in the review window.
	+	* Q3 2026 (July) — scheduled.
	+
	+	===== How readers help =====
	+
	+	* Spot a stale citation? Report via [[:corrections\|our corrections page]]. Acknowledgement in 24 hours, fix in 48 hours (typical).
	+	* Know a better primary source? Email ''admin@bighelpers.in'' with a link.
	+	* Reviewer interest? See [[:about:editorial-review\|the reviewer onboarding page]].
	+
	+	===== Related pages =====
	+
	+	* [[:about:editorial-review\|Editorial Review — reviewer onboarding]]
	+	* [[:about:editorial-policy\|Editorial Policy]]
	+	* [[:about:web-vitals-audit\|Web Vitals audit baseline]]
	+	* [[:corrections\|Corrections]]
	+	* [[:content-roadmap-implementation\|Implementation plan]] (editorial-internal)
	+
	+	----
	+
	+	//Last reviewed: 21 April 2026.//
	+
	+	{{tag>about editorial-audit quarterly-review process}}

2026/05/03 11:03	current
Line 1:	Line 1:
	+	{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(rti wiki editorial review,retired ic reviewer,rti wiki editorial board,rti content review,editorial process rti)&metatag-description=(RTI Wiki's editorial-review process and how retired Information Commissioners and senior advocates join as reviewers. Scope, commitment, and contact.)}}
	+
	+	====== Editorial Review — Reviewer Onboarding ======
	+
	+	{{page>_snippets:dpdp-banner}}
	+
	+	<WRAP center round info 95%>
	+	RTI Wiki is looking for retired Information Commissioners and senior RTI advocates to join our editorial-review panel. The commitment is light (one sitting per quarter, 30-45 minutes). The contribution is decisive — you tighten our factual accuracy and catch errors before citizens rely on them.
	+	</WRAP>
	+
	+	===== Why RTI Wiki reviews content =====
	+
	+	This site is used by citizens filing their first RTI, by Public Information Officers training in their role, and by First Appellate Authorities drafting reasoned orders. A wrong fee rate, a stale case citation, a superseded clause — each can cause a citizen to miss a deadline or a PIO to sign an appealable order.
	+
	+	We already:
	+
	+	* Verify every published article — a green "Verified" badge appears at the top of the page, backed by the entry in ''conf/verified.json''.
	+	* Cite statute and case law — every ground, exemption, and procedural claim links to the Act section and the binding authority.
	+	* Link to primary sources — CIC orders, SC and HC judgements (via India Kanoon or the court's own portal).
	+	* Track last-reviewed date — visible at the bottom of every article; auto-emitted as `dateModified` in the article's schema.org JSON-LD.
	+
	+	What we do not yet have — independent editorial oversight by people who wrote the rulings, drafted the orders, and appeared in the appeals that shape Indian RTI practice. That is what this panel is for.
	+
	+	===== Who we are looking for =====
	+
	+	* Retired Central or State Information Commissioners — any tenure, any jurisdiction.
	+	* Senior RTI advocates — at least ten years of pleaded RTI appeals in the High Courts or the Commissions.
	+	* Retired Public Information Officers at senior rank — Joint Secretary / Commissioner-level, with a substantive RTI docket history.
	+	* Retired Secretaries / Additional Secretaries who administered Section 4 disclosures.
	+	* Academics specialising in transparency law — tenured faculty with published work on the RTI Act or comparative information-rights regimes.
	+
	+	===== What the commitment looks like =====
	+
	+	==== Quarterly sitting ====
	+
	+	* Frequency. Once per quarter (four times a year).
	+	* Duration. 30 to 45 minutes.
	+	* Format. Video call (Zoom / Google Meet) or a written exchange — whichever the reviewer prefers.
	+	* Agenda. The editor brings 5-10 articles that have been updated since the last sitting. The reviewer flags any factual error, stale citation, or tonal issue. The editor takes the note and fixes.
	+
	+	==== Topic-specific review ====
	+
	+	We may also reach out for a single-article review when the article concerns the reviewer's specialism. Example: an article on PIO procedure under Section 7 might be sent to a retired Information Commissioner who decided many §7(8)(i) matters. A single-article review is usually 15-20 minutes, written.
	+
	+	==== No ghostwriting expected ====
	+
	+	Reviewers do not draft content. The editor drafts; the reviewer flags errors or suggests sharper framing. All edits are the editor's responsibility.
	+
	+	===== What reviewers receive =====
	+
	+	* Public acknowledgement. Reviewers are listed on the Editorial Board page with their designation and tenure — opt-out on request.
	+	* A direct line to the editor. Feedback loops are fast; corrections typically go live within 48 hours.
	+	* Citation credit. Articles a reviewer has substantively shaped carry a small footnote: "Reviewed by [Name], former Chief Information Commissioner, [State]."
	+	* Copies of updates. Reviewers receive a quarterly digest of what changed, for their own records.
	+	* No honorarium or fee (the site runs on ad revenue and is not a commercial publication). We offer this as public-interest volunteer work.
	+
	+	===== What RTI Wiki is not =====
	+
	+	* Not a news outlet. We cover the Act, not daily headlines. We archive significant CIC orders and landmark court rulings; we do not report on breaking news.
	+	* Not a litigation service. Our tools (Generator, First Appeal Builder, PIO Reply Checker, Question Builder) assist the citizen to draft their own application or appeal. They do not file on anyone's behalf.
	+	* Not a partisan platform. Reviewers from across the political spectrum are welcome, so long as the feedback is factual and procedural.
	+
	+	===== Our editorial principles =====
	+
	+	- Statute first, case-law second, commentary last. Every claim cites either a section of the Act, a binding judgement, or a published CIC order. Opinion is clearly marked.
	+	- No "why" questions in sample RTIs. We teach citizens to ask for records, not answers. See our drafting guide at [[:blog:how-to-write-rti-application\|Ask for records, not answers]].
	+	- Case-law currency. After every significant SC / HC ruling, we update the relevant articles within a week.
	+	- Plain-language rule. We aim for a ninth-standard reading level on citizen-facing pages. Legal-practitioner pages (PIO framework, FAA checklist) are written for the trained reader.
	+	- DPDP-compliant privacy. We follow the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 and the 2025 Rules. See our [[:privacy-policy\|Privacy Policy]].
	+
	+	===== Our commitment to corrections =====
	+
	+	* Response within 24 hours for any substantive correction notice.
	+	* Fix within 48 hours when the correction is clearly supported by source.
	+	* Credit (on request) in the article's footer: "Correction by [Name], [date]".
	+	* Public changelog. See [[:corrections\|corrections page]] for reporting errors and the SLA.
	+
	+	===== How to join =====
	+
	+	Write to [[mailto:admin@bighelpers.in\|admin@bighelpers.in]] with the subject line "Editorial Review — Interest" and a short note:
	+
	+	* Your role(s) in RTI practice over the last ten years.
	+	* Your specialism (e.g. Section 8 case law, police records, service records, forest rights, scheme-specific).
	+	* Whether you are available for quarterly sittings, single-article reviews, or both.
	+	* Whether you are comfortable with public acknowledgement on the Editorial Board page.
	+
	+	The editor will reply within three working days.
	+
	+	===== Current editorial stack =====
	+
	+	* Editor. Shrawan Pathak. Contact: [[mailto:admin@bighelpers.in\|admin@bighelpers.in]].
	+	* Verified articles. Around 190 pages carry the green "Verified" badge, reflecting editor-level review.
	+	* Review cadence. //Last reviewed// dates are published on every article.
	+	* Editorial calendar. Quarterly reviewer sittings are planned from Q2 2026.
	+
	+	===== Related pages =====
	+
	+	* [[:about:editorial-policy\|Editorial Policy]]
	+	* [[:about:what-is-rti-wiki\|What is RTI Wiki?]]
	+	* [[:corrections\|Report a correction]]
	+	* [[:about:editor\|Editor — Shrawan Pathak]]
	+	* [[:privacy-policy\|Privacy Policy]]
	+
	+	----
	+
	+	//Last reviewed: 21 April 2026.//
	+
	+	{{tag>about editorial-review reviewer-onboarding editorial-board}}