SEO fieldnotes

Research and source handling

25 checkable notes for research and source handling.

  1. Find the original statisticA statistic arrives through a chain of summaries.
  2. Record a source access dateA web page may change after drafting.
  3. Separate source and interpretationA report's finding is mixed with the writer's conclusion.
  4. Evaluate a vendor benchmarkA provider measures its own product.
  5. Handle a missing source linkA draft contains a claim with no recoverable origin.
  6. Reconcile two source datesA document has publication and revision dates.
  7. Create a source ledgerResearch is scattered across browser tabs.
  8. Assess a survey denominatorA percentage sounds impressive without its base.
  9. Read a chart before quoting itA visual trend hides scale or category changes.
  10. Handle an unavailable documentA cited report has moved or disappeared.
  11. Distinguish policy from practiceA written process is presented as proof of execution.
  12. Use a secondary source openlyThe original source cannot be consulted.
  13. Check a definition before comparisonTwo sources use the same term differently.
  14. Retain negative findingsResearch contradicts the planned story.
  15. Build a source freshness ruleDifferent facts become stale at different rates.
  16. Use screenshots as evidenceA screenshot captures only one state.
  17. Separate public and private sourcesResearch notes contain confidential material.
  18. Avoid circular citationsSeveral articles repeat the same unsupported assertion.
  19. Check methodology exclusionsA result depends on omitted cases.
  20. Document a calculationA derived figure cannot be found verbatim in the source.
  21. Choose a source for a claimA prestigious publication is not automatically the right evidence.
  22. Track an embargoed sourceA source has a publication restriction.
  23. Handle source correctionsA cited publisher changes a material fact.
  24. Write a limits paragraphReaders need to understand uncertainty without losing the answer.
  25. Prepare a fact-check packetA reviewer should not repeat the entire research process.