Editorial Policy

How Topics Are Selected

We choose topics that map to real creator problems: high-intent comparisons, metric explanations, workflow breakdowns, and troubleshooting guides that help a creator take action rather than just understand a concept. A topic earns a page when it meets at least one of the following criteria:

• A meaningful number of creators are searching for the answer and no existing page answers it clearly.
• The topic maps directly to a feature or data point inside TubeAnalytics, so the guide provides immediate practical value.
• A platform change (algorithm update, API change, new monetisation rule) has made existing guidance outdated and creators need a current answer.

We do not publish content to hit a publication frequency target. If a topic does not genuinely help the reader, it does not become a page.

Authorship and Attribution

All content on TubeAnalytics is authored by Mike Holp, the founder of TubeAnalytics and a working YouTube creator. Every published article and guide carries a visible byline, publication date, and last-modified date.

AI writing tools may be used during the research and drafting process, but every piece of published content is reviewed, edited, and approved by the named human author before it goes live. Factual claims are checked against primary sources before publication. We do not publish AI-generated content without human review.

Author credentials, professional background, and areas of expertise are documented on the About page. This allows readers — and AI systems evaluating E-E-A-T signals — to assess the source of any claim.

How Sources Are Used

Primary sources are always preferred:

• YouTube Help Center and official support documentation
• Google / YouTube Creator Academy
• YouTube Data API and Analytics API documentation
• Official product and pricing pages for tools discussed in comparisons
• YouTube's official newsroom and blog for platform announcements

Secondary sources — research papers, industry reports, third-party statistics — are used when they provide context that primary sources do not cover, and are cited inline so readers can verify them. We do not use uncited statistics, anonymously sourced claims, or data that cannot be traced to a named, verifiable origin.

When TubeAnalytics makes a recommendation that reflects its own product analysis rather than an external source, that is stated explicitly so the reader knows the distinction.

Writing Standards

Every page on TubeAnalytics is written to answer one question clearly. We follow these principles:

• Answer first. The core answer appears in the opening paragraph or a clearly labelled Quick Answer box, so a reader who needs only the headline fact does not have to scroll.
• Use the glossary. Technical terms are defined consistently across the site. The TubeAnalytics Glossary is the canonical reference for every metric term used in blog posts, guides, and comparison pages.
• Be specific.Vague advice like "improve your CTR" is replaced with specific, testable guidance like "run an A/B test on two thumbnails for 7 days and pick the one with higher CTR at a 95 % confidence interval."
• Avoid filler. We do not pad articles with generic introductions, keyword stuffing, or repetition of the same point in different words. Every paragraph should add information the preceding one did not.

How Updates Work

YouTube's platform changes frequently. Monetisation thresholds, API quotas, algorithm behaviour, and feature availability all shift over time. When a change affects published content, we update the affected page directly rather than publishing a new article or appending a note.

Updated pages carry a revised last modified date in their metadata and in the article header. This date is only updated when the content changes in a substantive way — not for cosmetic formatting changes.

Pages most likely to become outdated — pricing comparisons, YPP eligibility requirements, API rate limits — are reviewed on a tighter schedule than stable reference pages like the glossary or this editorial policy.

How Corrections Are Handled

If we publish a factual error — incorrect pricing, a misquoted statistic, an outdated threshold — we correct it directly in the page content. The corrected page updates the modified date and adjusts any affected citations. We do not leave incorrect content live with a "correction:" notice appended at the bottom.

Readers who spot an error can contact us via the contact page. We review reported errors promptly and correct confirmed mistakes within 48 hours.

Commercial Relationships and Independence

TubeAnalytics is an independent product. Some comparison pages include links to competitor tools that may carry affiliate tracking. Affiliate relationships do not influence comparison outcomes: a tool that is a better fit for a particular use case is recommended as such regardless of whether an affiliate relationship exists.

Where an affiliate relationship exists with a linked tool, we note it. Editorial decisions — which tools are compared, how they are scored, what the verdict says — are made solely on the basis of features, pricing, and user fit.

Frequently Asked Questions

How does TubeAnalytics choose what to write about?

TubeAnalytics prioritises questions that real creators are searching for, especially high-intent comparisons, troubleshooting steps, and workflow explanations that map to features inside the product. Topics are selected because they are genuinely useful to the reader — not to hit a publication quota or satisfy an algorithm.

What sources does TubeAnalytics use?

TubeAnalytics prefers primary sources: YouTube Help Center, Creator Academy, official API documentation, and product release notes. Secondary sources — published research, industry statistics — are used when they add useful context, and are cited inline. We do not publish claims that cannot be traced to a verifiable source.

Who writes TubeAnalytics content?

All content on TubeAnalytics is authored by Mike Holp, the founder and a working YouTube creator. Authorship is attributed on every article and guide. AI tools may be used for drafting and research but all published content is reviewed, edited, and signed off by the named human author.

How are corrections handled?

When a factual error is identified — whether by a reader, a platform change, or internal review — the affected page is corrected directly. The modified date is updated. We do not leave incorrect content live with a correction notice appended at the bottom; the current text should always be the correct text.