Evidence first. Context always.

A claim is an assertion to examine

A claim’s presence is not an endorsement. Read its wording, assessment, confidence, review date, and sources together. Publication and assessment are separate decisions. Unverified does not mean false, and an investigation, complaint, or government action does not by itself prove an underlying allegation.

What the labels mean

• Verified

  The cited evidence establishes the claim as stated.

• Mostly Supported

  The evidence supports the main point, with stated limitations.

• Needs Context

  Additional context materially changes how the claim should be understood.

• Unsupported

  The reviewed evidence does not provide adequate support. This alone does not establish that the claim is false.

• Contradicted

  The reviewed evidence conflicts with the claim as stated.

• Unverified

  The claim has not been established by the evidence reviewed.

• Developing

  The available information is changing and the assessment may be revised.

Confidence levels

Confidence describes confidence in the stated assessment, not a numerical probability that an allegation is true. High means directly relevant evidence is clear and the principal limits are understood. Medium means the assessment is supported but important scope, attribution, completeness, or access limits remain. Low means evidence is incomplete, indirect, ambiguous, or unavailable. A high-confidence conclusion can be that a document does not establish a claim.

Primary and secondary sources

Primary sources include original studies, official actions, filings, contracts, and a person’s own statement. Secondary sources include reporting and summaries of those materials. A press release is primary evidence of what an agency announced; it is not necessarily an independent audit of its statistics. An interview records a participant’s account. A company history is a company’s representation. A complaint contains allegations, and a court’s ruling must be read for the question actually decided.

Source pages identify the producer, original link, date when known, purpose, and limitations. We distinguish original documents from reproductions, abstracts, directories, and search-index excerpts. Several articles repeating the same statement are not independent corroboration. Scientific results remain bounded by study sites, dates, sampling methods, and measured outcomes.

What we publish and what we hold

We publish neutrally described civic records and clearly labeled unresolved research leads. Weak, incomplete, secondary or disputed sourcing does not by itself prevent publication. Unverified claims remain explicitly unverified. Titles describe a claim, question or unresolved connection rather than presenting an unsupported allegation as fact.

Unresolved pages begin: “This page documents an unresolved claim or research lead. It is not a finding of fact.” Prominent labels identify limits such as WEAK SOURCING, SPECULATIVE THEORY, OWNERSHIP UNCONFIRMED, IDENTITY UNRESOLVED, CAUSATION NOT ESTABLISHED, SECONDARY SOURCE ONLY and ORIGINAL RECORD NOT OBTAINED. Pages separate what is documented, alleged and inferred from the missing evidence and what would resolve the question. Publication does not establish motive, corruption, criminality, ownership, causation or coordination.

We keep raw internal research PDFs, private working notes and sensitive personal leads private. A cleaned public catalog entry is not publication of its underlying private PDF or independent corroboration of its contents. Uncertainty labels do not remove a privacy exposure. A missing record or unsuccessful search is not proof that an event did not happen.

Updates and corrections

Each claim carries a last-reviewed date. That date records editorial review, not the date the event occurred. Articles show their publication date and updates; unknown source dates remain unknown. Material corrections identify what changed, why it changed, and the evidence prompting the change in the evidence summary or article body. Corrections to factual errors are distinguished from updates based on newly available information. If a source is withdrawn or contradicted, its dependent assessments need review too.

Readers assessing a possible error should identify the page, the exact statement, and an original record that supports the correction. This site does not currently provide a dedicated correction submission form. No response-time commitment or independent review is implied.

Neutrality and evidence limits

We apply the same standards to officials, companies, researchers, and residents. We do not infer motive, guilt, ownership, personal wealth, or hidden influence from association. Analysis is labeled. We distinguish what the reviewed record establishes, what it cannot establish, and what evidence would be needed to resolve an open question.