Practical guidePrimary-source preference
Official product pages, documentation, model cards, repositories, release notes, status pages, and legal policies are the starting point for product facts. The exact destination must support the claim being made.
Secondary sources
Third-party reporting, academic research, security analysis, and reproducible technical work can provide context, scrutiny, and evidence unavailable from a provider. Credibility depends on named authorship, method, dates, direct evidence, and correction history.
Anonymous and community claims
Anonymous posts, forums, and social media may reveal a problem worth investigating. They do not establish a price, policy, partnership, security event, official app, or current product status without corroboration.
Competitor sources
A provider may describe its own product, but its claims about a competitor are treated as interested statements. Comparisons verify each side against that side’s sources and label disputed or non-comparable claims.
Affiliate and commercial pages
Coupon directories, reseller pages, affiliate reviews, and lead-generation sites are not accepted as sole evidence of an official offer or product. The destination, terms, expiry, and provider identity must be verified through a separate source.
Low-quality and generated material
Scraped pages, unattributed summaries, search snippets, and AI-generated answers may be used to discover a lead but not as the factual foundation for publication. A fluent statement is not a source.
Citation and verification dates
Articles list sources and a fact-check date. Volatile claims are rechecked more frequently. A broken or changed source prompts investigation rather than silent substitution with a weaker page.