AI content humanisation

The audit shows what in the text needs improving so that it sounds natural, is coherent and matches the intent. I check above all naturalness, clarity and the logic of the argument, as well as an excess of generalities and repetition that reduce readability. I assess whether the message is consistent throughout the material and whether there are passages that sound like a template rather than a statement grounded in experience. The audit findings determine the scale of changes needed in the work that follows.

As part of the diagnosis I identify signals of “unnaturalness”, such as artificial constructions, excessive filler, overuse of the passive voice or a lack of specifics and examples. I then analyse coherence and structure: whether the text has a logical layout (introduction–body–conclusions), whether the headings match the content and whether the transitions between paragraphs are smooth. Separately, I assess the fit with the audience and the brand, i.e. the level of formality, vocabulary, sentence length, directness and perspective (we/you). Together, these elements show what exactly needs to be simplified, clarified or tidied up before the editorial guidelines are set.

• Assessment: naturalness, coherence, clarity, repetition, the logic of the argument and alignment with the intent.
• Diagnosis of “unnaturalness”: artificial constructions, filler, the passive voice, templated paragraphs, a lack of specifics and examples.
• Coherence and structure: the layout of the text, headings matching the content, smooth transitions between paragraphs.
• Fit with the audience and the brand: formality, vocabulary, sentence length, perspective and directness.

I set editorial guidelines so that the whole content package is consistent in tone, style of notation and the way information is conveyed. We agree the rules on tone, formatting and how to present examples so that they sound natural and are useful. I also define the standards for terminology and naming, to unify names, abbreviations, inflections and terms within a text and across materials. The outcome of these arrangements is a shared “reference point” for the main edit and for later quality control.

At this stage a decision is made about the level of intervention in the content: whether the corrections are to be cosmetic (language and flow) or include rebuilding the structure, cuts, reorganisation and adding specifics. We also agree whether the humanisation is to cover on-page SEO elements as well, such as headings, the meta description, the FAQ, internal linking and natural keyword density. The client receives a mini style guide for humanisation, i.e. a short set of rules that makes approval easier and helps maintain consistency in subsequent texts. The guidelines cover, among other things, recommended and prohibited phrases, the form of headings and the standard for writing numbers, units, lists and CTAs.

• Agreeing the tone, formatting and the way examples are presented.
• Setting terminology and naming standards for the whole content package.
• A decision on the level of intervention: a light edit vs rebuilding the structure and adding specifics.
• Optionally agreeing whether on-page SEO elements are included (e.g. headings, meta description, FAQ, internal linking, natural keyword density).
• Mini style guide: tone, recommended/prohibited phrases, the standard for headings, numbers, units, lists and CTAs, and examples of the preferred style.

I ensure consistency with the guidelines through quality control, which verifies the edited text in terms of language, content and communication risks. I check compliance with the agreed writing rules, including the tone, formatting standards and adopted terminology. Fact-checking takes place within the limits of the sources provided, so that no information is added that cannot be backed up by the materials. I also catch risks such as excessive promises and imprecise generalisations, which can weaken the credibility of the message.

This stage also depends on the client providing sources and approving the facts. If the materials are not provided or the data is not approved, the content is humanised stylistically without adding unverified information. As a result, the version after quality control is ready for the next step of the collaboration: collecting feedback and clarifying disputed passages. I match the scope of verification to what has been agreed regarding the number of texts, their type and the formal requirements.

• Language check: clarity, coherence and naturalness of the writing after editing.
• Check of compliance with the guidelines: tone, formatting, terminology and naming standards.
• Fact-checking within the limits of the sources provided, and risk control (e.g. excessive promises, imprecise generalisations).
• Condition of the collaboration: where sources or approval of the facts are missing — stylistic humanisation without adding unverified data.