Hlr Student Editor Review

---
name: hlr-student-editor-review
description: Use when working with Harvard Law Review (HLR) student editors after an offer — the intensive substantive and technical edit, the cite-check / source-pull, and author responsiveness. Manages the relationship and process; it does not run the pre-offer placement (hlr-placement-strategy) or the author-side cite apparatus build (hlr-footnotes-and-cite-check).
---

# Student-Editor Review (hlr-student-editor-review)

HLR is **student-edited**: once your piece is accepted, smart law students — not anonymous faculty peers
— run an **intensive edit**. Expect substantive pushback on the argument, heavy technical editing, and a
full **cite-check / source-pull** in which editors verify every footnote against the actual source. This
is more hands-on than peer review at most journals. This skill helps you work *with* the editors and
protect your argument while clearing the process.

## When to trigger

- You have an offer and the editing process is beginning
- Editors sent a marked-up draft, queries, or a source-pull request
- You disagree with an edit and need to decide how to respond
- A deadline for returning the edit or sources is approaching

## What the HLR edit involves

| Stage | What editors do | What they need from you |
|-------|-----------------|--------------------------|
| Substantive edit | Press the argument, flag gaps, ask for clarification or support | Defend, clarify, or revise — engage on the merits |
| Technical / line edit | Tighten prose, enforce house style and Bluebook | Approve or push back on specific changes |
| **Cite-check / source-pull** | Verify **every footnote** against the actual source | Provide pulled sources or exact pincites on demand, fast |
| Page proofs | Final formatting and corrections | Careful, timely proof review |

## The source-pull (the distinctive demand)

HLR editors will **pull every source** and confirm that each footnote actually supports the proposition,
that quotations are accurate, and that pincites are correct. To survive it without pain:

1. **Be pull-ready before you submit.** Keep a copy of every cited source with the cited page marked
   (build this in `hlr-footnotes-and-cite-check`).
2. **Answer queries precisely.** When an editor says "source does not support proposition," either point
   to the exact page that does, or revise the claim — do not argue around it.
3. **Turn sources around fast.** The edit runs on a schedule; slow responses stall the whole piece.
4. **Flag anything you cannot source.** If a proposition has no clean support, fix it now, not at proof.

## Working with student editors (relationship craft)

- **Treat editors as collaborators, not obstacles.** They are improving the piece and protecting the
  journal's accuracy; engaging in good faith makes substantive disagreements easier to win.
- **Pick your battles.** Concede style and Bluebook calls; defend the argument and your voice where it
  matters, with reasons.
- **Respond on the merits.** "I'm the expert" loses; "the source on page X supports this because…" wins.
- **Be responsive and on time.** Responsiveness is noticed and reciprocated; it is also how the piece
  stays on the publication calendar.

## Checklist

- [ ] Every cited source kept and pull-ready with the cited page marked
- [ ] Editor queries answered with exact pincites or honest revisions
- [ ] Style/Bluebook edits conceded; argument defended with reasons
- [ ] Sources and edits returned by the deadline
- [ ] Any unsupportable proposition fixed before proofs
- [ ] Tone collaborative throughout

## Anti-patterns

- Treating the edit as an attack and stonewalling editors
- Fighting every line edit and Bluebook fix instead of conceding the small stuff
- "Trust me, I'm the author" responses to source-pull queries
- Slow turnarounds that stall the piece and annoy the editing team
- Discovering an unsourceable claim at the page-proof stage

## Output format

```
【Stage】substantive / technical / source-pull / proofs
【Open queries】count + the hard ones
【Source-pull readiness】all sources pullable with marked pincites? [Y/N]
【Battles】what to concede vs. defend (with reasons)
【Deadline】next return date
【Next】hlr-revision-and-editing (work the edit cycle to completion)
```

## Supplementary resources

- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — HLR organization, student-edited model
- [`../../resources/external_tools.md`](../../resources/external_tools.md) — citators and source-management tools for the pull