# Inclusive Language Review

Identify unnecessary assumptions, stereotypes, exclusionary framing, imprecise identity language, euphemism, blame, and avoidable barriers in content.

## Usage note

Use this review with people who understand the audience and the subject. Preferences vary across individuals, communities, regions, and time; ask named people how they wish to be described and consult current community-informed guidance. Inclusive editing should increase accuracy and access, not erase relevant differences or reduce people to a generic label. Escalate sensitive high-impact work appropriately.

## How to use this template

1. Define audience, context, decision, identities mentioned, and relevant current guidance.
2. Highlight assumptions about people, resources, roles, access, knowledge, and behavior.
3. Review identity terms, agency, blame, metaphors, examples, quotations, and imagery.
4. Consult named people, affected perspectives, and qualified reviewers as appropriate.
5. Approve precise revisions, record unresolved preferences, and plan multilingual review.

## Blank template

### Review context

- **Content and version:** [Page or file]
- **Primary audience:** [Roles, contexts, and diversity]
- **Purpose and consequence:** [What the content influences]
- **People or groups mentioned:** [Exact terms]
- **Source of identity details:** [Self-identification, record, reporting]
- **Current guidance consulted:** [Community/organizational source and date]
- **Reviewer perspectives:** [Relevant experience]
- **High-impact sections:** [Eligibility, health, rights, safety, policy, other]

### Language finding

- **Current wording:** [Exact passage]
- **Finding type:** [Assumption, stereotype, label, metaphor, blame, omission]
- **Why it matters:** [Accuracy, agency, access, harm, or comprehension]
- **Evidence or preference:** [Source]
- **Proposed revision:** [Exact wording]
- **Meaning preserved:** [Necessary factual distinction]
- **Additional voice needed:** [Person or community perspective]
- **Locale implication:** [Translation or cultural review]

### Final checks

- [ ] Reader instructions do not assume unnecessary resources or relationships.
- [ ] Identity is included only when relevant and accurately sourced.
- [ ] Names, pronouns, and group terms reflect current preferences.
- [ ] Metaphors do not stigmatize identity or health.
- [ ] Actors and responsibility remain clear.
- [ ] Examples distribute expertise and agency thoughtfully.
- [ ] Affected perspectives are not tokenized or exposed without consent.
- [ ] Localized versions receive context-specific review.