CASE STUDY 01

Citely / Literfy | A Content Workflow Practice from Product Features to Medium Blog Publishing

Around Citely and Literfy feature points, I turned capabilities such as citation verification, source tracing, and literature review support into repeatable English blog topics, then ran a real workflow from writing and visuals through publishing and review.

Project focus

English blog publishing practice around Citely, Literfy, and related academic AI tools

My task

Turn product features into repeatable English blog topics and connect the path from writing to publishing and review

Outputs

Four published blogs, article screenshots, a publishing workflow, and review materials

Evidence

Published Medium screenshots, article links, and dashboard screenshots

PRODUCT CONTEXT

Products in this case

This case revolves around the core functions of Citely and Literfy: understand the problem each product solves first, then translate those functions into English blog topics that research users can actually understand.

Citely homepage screenshot showing Find Sources and Verify References entry points.

Citely

A citation-checking and source-tracing tool for academic writing that helps users identify suspicious citations, verify references, and trace claims back to their original sources.

Citation CheckerSource FinderResearch Assistant
Literfy homepage screenshot showing the workflow from real papers to literature reviews.

Literfy

An integrated workflow from real-paper search to literature-review writing, covering paper filtering, outline generation, grounded review drafting, and citation export.

Paper SearchReview OutlineGrounded Writing
01

Project task

This case was not about rewriting product features into a few isolated posts. It was about breaking Citely and Literfy feature points into repeatable English blog topics, then connecting writing, visuals, publishing, and review into one workflow I could run again.

In practice, I had to start from the real moments where research users get stuck, then decide what problem each article should open with, what visuals it needed, what feedback mattered after publishing, and how the next round should be adjusted.

Core work scope

Feature breakdownEnglish blog topicsWriting and visualsPublishing review
02

My breakdown method

I did not begin with generic topics. I mapped product features to user problems first, then defined the article themes.

Product feature

Citation verification

User problem

Whether citations are real and references can be checked quickly

Content theme

Citation checking

Product feature

Source tracing

User problem

Whether sources can be traced and how references connect to each other

Content theme

Source finding

Product feature

Literature review writing

User problem

How literature reviews should be organized and where AI can realistically help

Content theme

Literature review support

Product feature

Academic integrity

User problem

Whether AI-generated content is reliable and how fake citations should be handled

Content theme

AI hallucination / fake citation

Product feature

Research workflow

User problem

How the research-writing workflow can become more efficient and where tools fit into real work

Content theme

Research workflow

03

Publishing workflow

01

Brief

Scope and angle

Define the product feature, target user, and article angle.

02

Draft

Draft structure

Draft the article from the brief and refine the structure.

03

Source Check

Check accuracy

Check citations, tool information, and content accuracy.

04

Images

Prepare visuals

Prepare image tasks and article visual materials.

05

Publish

Publish setup

Publish to Medium and set the title, tags, and core metadata.

06

Review

Review signals

Record views, reads, claps, and followers, then note headline and topic feedback.

04

Published content and evidence

Each blog card keeps the real published screenshot and explains the user problem, mapped feature, and evidence type it proves.

CitelyPublished on Medium

Academic Citations: Understanding Common Errors and How to Avoid Them

Frames citation verification as a basic research-writing task by starting from common citation mistakes and research credibility.

Medium screenshot of Academic Citations, including the title, author line, and opening body.

User problem

Students and research writers worry about citation mistakes but do not know how to check whether references are real and reliable.

Product feature

Citation verification / Academic integrity

Evidence

Article screenshot / article link

Citation VerificationAcademic IntegrityResearch Writing
LiterfyPublished on Medium

Beyond Note-taking: Building an Automated 'Academic Second Brain' with Literfy, Zotero, and...

Places Literfy back into a real research workflow, showing how literature organization, knowledge capture, and AI tools can sit in the same path.

Medium screenshot of Beyond Note-taking, including the headline, author line, and opening body.

User problem

In research writing, source relationships and organization paths are often unclear, and users do not always know how AI tools fit into their existing workflow.

Product feature

Research workflow / Source tracing

Evidence

Article screenshot / article link

Literature ReviewResearch WorkflowZotero
CitelyPublished on Medium

Stop Wasting Hours on Citations: How Smart Students Verify References in Seconds

Uses citation verification and source tracing to explain how students can check references more efficiently instead of tracing sources manually for hours.

Medium screenshot of Stop Wasting Hours on Citations, including the headline, author line, and opening body.

User problem

Students know citations need checking, but do not know how to verify them quickly and do not want to spend too much time on source tracing.

Product feature

Citation verification / Source tracing

Evidence

Article screenshot / article link

Citation VerificationSource TracingEfficiency
LiterfyPublished on Medium

Can AI Really Write a Literature Review?

Explores the real boundary of literature review writing by clarifying what AI can support and what it should not replace.

Medium screenshot of Can AI Really Write a Literature Review?, including the headline, author line, and opening body.

User problem

Users want to know whether AI can assist with literature reviews and where the real boundary lies in research writing.

Product feature

Literature review writing

Evidence

Article screenshot / article link

Literature ReviewAcademic ToolsResearch Workflow
05

Publishing feedback and next steps

This section keeps a real post-publish snapshot rather than framing it as a performance result. The numbers are still small, so I use them mainly to judge which titles, tags, and topic directions are worth testing next.

Medium dashboard screenshot showing views, reads, and most-viewed stories.

REVIEW NOTES

Review focus

I treat this report as review material rather than proof of growth. It helps me see what worked in this round and where the next round should be adjusted.

  1. 01

    Start with views and reads to judge whether the headline and opening explain the problem clearly enough.

  2. 02

    Then use claps and followers to see whether the article has any basic pull beyond the first click.

  3. 03

    Topics tied directly to writing pain points, such as citation verification, are more worth continuing to test.

  4. 04

    Tags that point to concrete research scenarios are more useful to keep than abstract feature words.

  5. 05

    The next round will keep comparing problem-led headlines with tool-led headlines to see which framing earns the click.

  6. 06

    Publishing cadence, the first paragraph, and article structure still need tuning to find a steadier reading pattern.

Next

Continue exploring or get in touch

Keep the bottom actions lightweight so they support the case study instead of overpowering it.