Editorial guidance
Sources, evidence, and corrections
The central question is practical: does the source support the specific claim, in the context and period in which it is used?
Source types
Use the best evidence available for the claim
1
Primary and direct records
Laws, official datasets, court or government records, organisational documents, direct interviews, photographs with known provenance, and creator or project pages. These are strongest for what a record says or what an organisation states about itself.
2
Independent reporting and research
Credible journalism, academic work, evaluations, and reports can provide verification, interpretation, and context beyond an organisation's own account.
3
Community records and oral history
Attributed testimony, oral history, locally held documents, community media, and firsthand accounts are important where formal archives are thin. Editors record who provided the information, when, and in what context whenever it is safe to do so.
4
Organisational and self-published sources
Useful for names, programme descriptions, dates, announcements, and stated intentions. They should not be the only evidence for disputed claims or independent assessments of impact.
5
Social posts and temporary notices
Useful for current notices and leads, but posts can disappear or lack context. Important claims should be preserved with a date and supported by a more durable record where possible.
Not a source: AI-generated text, search snippets, and unattributed summaries can help locate material but do not establish a fact.
Care and safety
Living people require stronger care
Claims about living people should be relevant, fairly stated, and supported by clear evidence. Private addresses, case details, identity records, medical information, and information that may expose someone to protection risks are not published. Images require a clear public source or permission appropriate to their use.
Time and context
Current information must carry a date
Population totals, operating services, funding levels, leadership, infrastructure counts, and policy implementation can change. Entries identify the reporting period and avoid presenting an old figure as a current fact. An official source may be authoritative but still out of date.
Review pathways
Corrections are different from additions
Correct an error of fact
Identify the exact statement and provide evidence showing why it is inaccurate. Primary evidence is preferred; credible independent evidence may be accepted where a primary record is unavailable.
Add information or an entry
Missing context, new topics, photographs, and proposed profiles are reviewed for scope, sourcing, safety, and lasting reference value. They are additions, not corrections.
Uncertainty
Do not force a false certainty
When credible records disagree, the entry should describe the disagreement, identify the dates and sources, and avoid selecting one version without a sound reason. Developing entries are labelled when important current details remain unconfirmed.
Constructive comments, questions, and suggestions are welcome. The volunteer team cannot research private family histories, identify or value artefacts, or provide casework. Review and response times depend on available capacity.