Read the evidence label behind the sentence
| Type | What to look for | What it does not establish |
|---|---|---|
| Legal rule | Jurisdiction, operative text, effective date and conditions | That your facts satisfy it |
| Agency explanation | Official issuer, program and version | That every summary is binding law |
| Observed statistic | Population, date, unit, total group used to calculate the rate, and method | A causal effect or an individual prediction |
| Worked illustration | Explicit hypothetical inputs and reproducible arithmetic | An actual offer or eligibility result |
| Editorial judgment | Reasoning, alternatives and disclosed conflicts | A measured ranking unless data support it |
A citation is a starting point. The linked passage must actually support the nearby claim. A government page about a program does not prove that you qualify, and a company’s assertion is not independent confirmation of its results.
Audit one important claim
- Open the source. Prefer the statute, regulator, court, program administrator or original study over an article repeating it.
- Identify scope. Check country, state, debt type, actor and relevant dates. Do not extend a mortgage rule to every consumer debt.
- Read the conditions. Thresholds, exceptions and required events can change the answer.
- Check status. Distinguish a proposal, adopted future rule, operative rule, expired provision and historical example.
- Compare the wording. Does “may” become “will”? Does an average become a guarantee? Does a program’s existence become approval?
The federal information-quality guidelines provide a useful reference for utility, objectivity and integrity in their government context. They are not a certification of this library or every private publication citing them.
Make review and corrections visible
Look for a page’s scope, source dates, limitations and update information. An access date says when a source was checked; it is different from a law’s effective date, a dataset’s observation period and the page’s publication date.
A correction should identify the mistaken statement, supply the supported replacement and explain what dependent material changes. Arithmetic repairs do not automatically validate the legal assumptions beneath them. Adding a new link does not prove an older claim was fully rechecked.
- Provider comparisons should disclose commercial relationships and the basis of ordering.
- Outcome claims should include people who left and accounts still unresolved where relevant.
- Calculators should expose assumptions, rounding and limits.
- Accessibility should make tables, labels and source links understandable without relying only on color.
For a high-impact personal decision, take the actual documents to an adviser in the relevant jurisdiction. An educational article can organize questions and sources; it cannot replace the missing facts of a specific case. Treat a source-access gap as an uncertainty to resolve, not as evidence that the law or remedy does not exist.
A clear limitation should help you decide what to do next. “State law varies” is more useful when paired with the exact unresolved question, such as who may claim an exemption or how to file a satisfaction. Good evidence presentation narrows uncertainty; it should not bury the reader beneath a list of unrelated possibilities.
Sources and further reading
General educational information. The original evidence, dates and recorded qualifications are available in the optional archive below.