Writing & Editing Prompts
Inclusive Language and Bias Editor
Review writing for unnecessary stereotypes, exclusion, coded assumptions, accessibility barriers, and imprecise group references while preserving relevant meaning.
FreeClaudeChatGPT
Best for
Editors, researchers, product teams, and communicators checking whether language is accurate, respectful, accessible, and relevant to the subject.
Suitable LLM groups
FrontierReasoning
Prompt
You are an inclusive language editor who specializes in precise, respectful, audience-aware communication without flattening legitimate differences.
Inputs:
1. Draft text: {{draft}}
2. Audience, context, purpose, and publication: {{context}}
3. People, communities, or identities referenced: {{people_context}}
4. Preferred terminology, house style, and source evidence: {{language_guidance}}
5. Legal, historical, quotation, accessibility, and editorial constraints: {{constraints}}
Do the following:
1. Identify references to people, groups, ability, age, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, class, family, health, and other characteristics, including indirect or coded language.
2. Flag stereotypes, deficit framing, irrelevant identity labels, false universals, assumed norms, dehumanizing abstraction, euphemism, patronizing tone, imprecise collective nouns, and examples that systematically exclude users.
3. Distinguish harmful or inaccurate wording from identity information that is necessary for analysis, self-identification, historical accuracy, direct quotation, legal meaning, or addressing inequity.
4. Recommend precise revisions with rationale, preserving the author's substantive claim and marking terminology that should be verified with the people or community concerned.
5. Produce the revised text, severity-ranked issue table, terminology questions, representation gaps, and editorial checklist. Do not infer anyone's identity, impose one universal label, or silently alter quotations.How to use
- Provide audience and publication context.
- Include preferred terminology or community guidance.
- Mark direct quotations and legal language.
- Ask affected reviewers to validate sensitive terminology.
Example input
Draft: Recruitment brochure for a manufacturing apprenticeship describing candidates as “young men with mechanical instincts” and saying the program is “easy to understand even for non-native speakers.” Audience: school leavers and career changers. Context: roles require spatial reasoning and safe tool use, not a specific gender or age. Guidance: use person-first or identity-first disability language according to individual preference; retain the legal program title. Constraint: direct trainee quotations may not be changed without approval.
Example output
The edit replaces gendered and age-limited candidate framing with observable interests and skills, changes “mechanical instincts” to examples of practical problem solving, and rewrites the language claim around plain-language support and translated materials. It preserves the legal title and flags a trainee quotation containing dated terminology for consent-based review rather than silent alteration. The issue table distinguishes exclusion risk, imprecision, and representation gaps in imagery examples.
Customization tips
- — Keep identity details when analytically relevant.
- — Replace assumed traits with observable requirements.
- — Do not silently modernize historical quotations.
- — Review examples and imagery as well as labels.
Tags
#inclusive-language#bias-editing#editorial-review#accessible-writing#representation
FAQ
What is this prompt for?
It reviews writing for exclusion, stereotypes, irrelevant identity framing, assumed norms, and imprecise references to people.
How should I customize it?
Provide the draft, audience, purpose, people referenced, terminology guidance, quotations, historical context, legal language, and accessibility requirements.
Are there any limitations?
Terminology varies across people, communities, regions, and time; human review by those affected remains essential for sensitive contexts.
How is it different from a basic prompt?
It distinguishes relevant identity information from bias, preserves substantive meaning and quotations, and provides rationale, severity, terminology questions, and representation gaps.
Related Prompts
All Writing & Editing prompts →Free
Reading Level Adapter
Rewrites a piece of text to a specific target reading level or grade level while preserving accuracy, nuance, and key terminology where appropriate.
ClaudeChatGPTGemini
#readability#plain-language#editing
Free
Brand Voice Style Guide Builder
Derive a practical writing system from real samples, defining voice principles, language rules, examples, exceptions, and review criteria.
ClaudeChatGPT
#brand-voice#style-guide#editorial-standards
Free
Translation Brief and Bilingual QA Editor
Prepare a translation brief and review a source-target pair for meaning, terminology, tone, locale fit, formatting, and functional accuracy.
ClaudeChatGPT
#translation-qa#localization#bilingual-editing
Related Skills
Writing StudioFree
Plain Language Accessibility Rewriter
Rewrite complex content in clear, accessible language while preserving accuracy, essential terminology, meaning, and respectful tone.
ClaudeChatGPT
#plain language#accessible writing#clear communication
Brand & Creative DirectionFree
Inclusive Brand Language and Imagery Reviewer
Review brand language and imagery for inclusion, stereotypes, accessibility, representation, cultural sensitivity, context, and practical correction.
ClaudeChatGPT
#inclusive branding#representation review#brand accessibility
Writing StudioFree
Localization and Translation Quality Editor
Review translated content for meaning, fluency, terminology, tone, cultural fit, formatting, consistency, and localization readiness.
ClaudeChatGPT
#translation quality#localization editing#language QA
Related articles coming soon — visit the Learn hub.