copy-editing

What this skill does

# Copy Editing

Systematic copy improvement through focused editorial passes that enhance clarity, voice, proof, and conversion impact.

---

## Table of Contents

- [Keywords](#keywords)
- [Quick Start](#quick-start)
- [The Seven Sweeps Framework](#the-seven-sweeps-framework)
- [Quick-Pass Editing Guide](#quick-pass-editing-guide)
- [Common Copy Problems and Fixes](#common-copy-problems-and-fixes)
- [Style Consistency Standards](#style-consistency-standards)
- [Fact-Checking Protocol](#fact-checking-protocol)
- [Editorial Checklist](#editorial-checklist)
- [Best Practices](#best-practices)
- [Integration Points](#integration-points)

---

## Keywords

copy editing, editorial review, copy feedback, proofreading, content polishing, copy sweep, editorial standards, style consistency, grammar check, fact-checking, clarity editing, voice consistency, benefit framing, proof validation, specificity, conversion copy editing, marketing copy review, copy quality

---

## Quick Start

### Full Copy Review (Seven Sweeps)

1. Read through once without editing to understand the whole piece
2. Sweep 1 — Clarity: flag confusing sentences, unclear references, jargon
3. Sweep 2 — Voice and Tone: flag shifts in formality, personality inconsistencies
4. Sweep 3 — So What: flag features without benefits, claims without consequences
5. Sweep 4 — Prove It: flag unsubstantiated claims, missing social proof
6. Sweep 5 — Specificity: flag vague language, round numbers, generic statements
7. Sweep 6 — Heightened Emotion: strengthen pain points, aspirations, urgency
8. Sweep 7 — Zero Risk: remove barriers near CTAs, add trust signals

### Quick Copy Pass

1. Cut filler words (very, really, just, actually, basically)
2. Replace weak verbs (utilize > use, facilitate > help, leverage > use)
3. Fix passive voice (reports are generated > we generate reports)
4. Verify one idea per sentence, one topic per paragraph
5. Check CTA for action orientation

---

## The Seven Sweeps Framework

Edit through seven sequential passes. Each focuses on one dimension. After each sweep, verify previous sweeps are not compromised.

### Sweep 1: Clarity

**Focus:** Can the reader understand what you are saying on the first read?

**What to check:**
- Sentences trying to say too much (split them)
- Unclear pronoun references ("it" — what is "it"?)
- Jargon or insider language without explanation
- Ambiguous statements that could be read two ways
- Missing context that assumes reader knowledge

**Clarity killers to fix:**

| Problem | Fix |
|---------|-----|
| Sentence over 30 words | Split into two sentences |
| Abstract language | Replace with concrete example |
| Buried main point | Move to beginning of paragraph |
| Three-clause sentence | Simplify to one or two clauses |
| Undefined acronym | Spell out on first use |

**After this sweep:** Confirm the "Rule of One" (one idea per section) and "You Rule" (copy speaks to the reader as "you") are intact.

### Sweep 2: Voice and Tone

**Focus:** Does the copy sound consistent throughout?

**What to check:**
- Shifts between formal and casual language
- Inconsistent brand personality (joking in one paragraph, corporate in the next)
- Jarring mood changes without transition
- Word choices that do not match the established voice
- Mixing "we" and "the company" references

**Voice consistency indicators:**

| Consistent | Inconsistent |
|-----------|-------------|
| Same level of contractions throughout | Contractions in some sections, full forms in others |
| Humor style maintained | Random joke in otherwise serious copy |
| Same sentence structure patterns | Short punchy intro, corporate middle, casual close |
| Consistent use of "you" | Switching between "you," "users," "customers," "one" |

**After this sweep:** Return to Sweep 1 to ensure voice edits did not introduce confusion.

### Sweep 3: So What

**Focus:** Does every claim answer "why should I care?"

**The So What test:** For every statement, ask "So what?" If the copy does not answer with a deeper benefit, it needs work.

| Before (features only) | After (feature + benefit) |
|------------------------|--------------------------|
| "Our platform uses AI-powered analytics" | "Our AI analytics surface insights you would miss manually — so you make better decisions in half the time" |
| "SOC 2 Type II certified" | "SOC 2 certified — your security team approves us in days, not months" |
| "Real-time dashboard" | "See exactly what is happening right now, not what happened last week" |

**After this sweep:** Return to Sweeps 2 and 1.

### Sweep 4: Prove It

**Focus:** Is every claim backed with evidence?

**Types of proof to verify:**

| Proof Type | Strength | Example |
|-----------|----------|---------|
| Named testimonial | Strong | "Sarah Chen, VP Marketing at Stripe: 'Reduced our setup time by 60%'" |
| Specific statistic | Strong | "2,847 teams use [Product] daily" |
| Case study reference | Strong | "See how Linear reduced churn by 23% in 90 days" |
| Third-party validation | Strong | "Named a Leader in Gartner's Magic Quadrant 2025" |
| Customer logos | Medium | Recognizable brand logos with permission |
| Generic claim | Weak — flag it | "Customers love us," "Industry-leading" |

**Common proof gaps to flag:**
- "Trusted by thousands" (which thousands? give a number)
- "Industry-leading" (according to whom? cite the source)
- "Best-in-class" (by what measure?)
- "Customers love us" (show them saying it)
- Results claims without timeframe or specifics

**After this sweep:** Return to Sweeps 3, 2, and 1.

### Sweep 5: Specificity

**Focus:** Is the copy concrete enough to be compelling?

**Specificity upgrades:**

| Vague | Specific |
|-------|---------|
| "Save time" | "Save 4 hours every week" |
| "Many customers" | "2,847 teams" |
| "Fast results" | "Results in 14 days" |
| "Improve your workflow" | "Cut reporting time from 4 hours to 15 minutes" |
| "Great support" | "Average response time: 2 hours" |
| "Easy to use" | "Set up in 10 minutes, no code required" |
| "Affordable" | "Starting at $29/month" |
| "Scalable" | "Handles 10,000 to 10 million records without slowdown" |

**Rule:** If a claim cannot be made specific, it is probably filler. Cut it or replace it with something verifiable.

**After this sweep:** Return to Sweeps 4, 3, 2, and 1.

### Sweep 6: Heightened Emotion

**Focus:** Does the copy make the reader feel something?

**Emotional dimensions to check:**

| Emotion | Where to Use | Technique |
|---------|-------------|-----------|
| Pain/frustration | Problem section | Paint the "before" state vividly |
| Relief | Solution section | Show the contrast with current pain |
| Fear of missing out | Social proof | "Teams like yours already use..." |
| Pride | Aspiration section | "Be the team that..." |
| Confidence | CTA area | "Join 2,847 teams who already..." |
| Urgency | Near CTA | Only if genuine (real deadline, limited spots) |

**Emotion techniques:**
- Paint the "before" state with sensory detail
- Use micro-stories (1-2 sentences) from customer scenarios
- Ask questions that prompt self-reflection
- Reference shared experiences the audience recognizes

**After this sweep:** Return to Sweeps 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1.

### Sweep 7: Zero Risk

**Focus:** Have we removed every barrier to action?

**Friction checklist near CTAs:**
- [ ] What happens after clicking is clear (not a mystery)
- [ ] Objections addressed within 2 scrolls of the CTA
- [ ] Trust signals visible (guarantee, certifications, customer count)
- [ ] Next steps are specific ("Start your 14-day free trial" not "Get started")
- [ ] Risk reversals stated explicitly (money-back, no CC, cancel anytime)
- [ ] Privacy concerns addressed if form collects data

**After this sweep:** Return through all previous sweeps one final time.

---

## Quick-Pass Editing Guide

### Word-Level Cuts

**Always cut:**
very, really, extremely, incredibly, quite, rather, somewhat, just, actually, basically, essentially, literally (unle