Fact-check a creator explainer before publication.

1. Pull important claims out of the draft

Read the draft once for statements that a reader might rely on: prices, feature availability, eligibility, dates, numerical comparisons, and descriptions of how a service works. Put each meaningful claim on its own line. A sentence containing three promises may require three different checks.

Prioritize claims that are changeable or consequential. Label opinions as opinions instead of searching for a source to disguise them as facts. An original ATN example is the difference between “the documentation lists this export option” and “this is the easiest editor.” The first can be checked against a specific document; the second needs clearly explained criteria and evidence.

2. Match the source to the claim

Use official documentation for a service’s published controls and terms, and retain the relevant plan, region, version, and date. Treat a company’s claim about its own results as a company claim unless independent evidence establishes more. Several websites repeating the same announcement do not automatically create independent confirmation.

The Associated Press’s published principles emphasize identifying sources, accurate quotations, and avoiding rumor or distortion. For a creator explainer, ATN’s practical application is to open the underlying material and check what it actually supports. If you cannot establish a detail, narrow the statement, label the uncertainty, or leave it out rather than filling the gap with confident wording.

Sources: [1]

3. Keep a small evidence worksheet

Record enough context that another review can reproduce your conclusion. A useful note connects the exact claim to a source passage and explains any limitation. Keep direct quotations separate from your own paraphrase so the working notes do not accidentally become copied publication text.

An access error belongs in the research notes. It does not prove that a service closed or that an unsupported claim became false.

4. Check citations as well as the prose

Zotero documents that imported metadata depends on the information available from the source website and can vary in quality. If you use a citation manager, inspect the title, author or organization, date, and destination after importing. A reference attached to the wrong item can look convincing while directing readers elsewhere.

Then return to the finished prose. Confirm that the wording has not become broader than the evidence during editing and that numbers retain their units and qualifiers. Follow the reader-facing links, including references in graphics, descriptions, and captions. A bibliography is helpful, but it cannot compensate for an unsupported statement in the headline or summary.

Sources: [2]

5. Publish with a correction path

Before release, separate sponsorship or commercial relationships from the editorial conclusion. AP’s principles describe keeping advertising identifiable and correcting errors transparently. ATN recommends including a practical way to report a factual issue and keeping a record of substantive corrections.

When new evidence arrives, identify the affected claim, check the source again, and update related summaries that repeat it. Preserve the difference between an original publication date and a later verification date. Do not refresh every date merely because punctuation changed. A clear correction improves the resource; concealing the earlier mistake makes future maintenance harder for both readers and collaborators.

Sources: [1]