A source is useful only if it supports the exact claim on the page. A provider homepage may show that a service exists without proving that it supports a particular withdrawal route in a particular country.
Preferred sources
For current product rules and formal changes, we prefer material published by the service responsible for the rule. Depending on the claim, that may include:
- official terms, fee schedules, help pages or product documentation;
- official status, support or change notices;
- official regulatory or public records relevant to the claim; and
- direct statements published through a service’s verified channels.
A primary source is not automatically complete or current. We check whether it applies to the right country, product, account type and date.
Secondary and community sources
Reputable reporting, specialist publications and other secondary material can provide context or identify a change that needs investigation. Community posts, forum discussions, social posts, screenshots and individual reports may reveal a problem, but they do not by themselves prove that the same conditions apply to all users.
When a personal report is the only lead, we treat it as a lead. We look for checkable documentation before converting it into a general claim. If no stronger evidence exists, the limitation must be visible or the claim should remain unpublished.
Source fit and recency
We assess a source against four questions:
- Does it directly support the statement?
- Does it cover the relevant country, currency, product and account type?
- Is its date known, and is there evidence that a later rule replaced it?
- Can a reader inspect it, or can the Editorial Team preserve enough information to verify what it said?
A newer date does not always make a source better. A recent general page may be less useful than an older formal notice with a clear effective date. We use the source that best fits the claim and explain any important time limit.
Conflicting sources
Conflicts are not resolved by counting links. We first check whether the sources describe different countries, account types or dates. If they truly disagree, we prefer the source with direct authority over the rule, provided it is current and specific. When the conflict remains unresolved, we qualify the statement or withhold it.
Links, access and source changes
Sources can move, change or disappear. A working link is useful, but a link alone is not proof that the claim still holds. When a source changes materially, the affected record should be reviewed.
A citation does not mean the source endorses Freelance Signal, and our use of a source does not mean we endorse every statement on that source.
Submit a relevant source through Contact. See Methodology for how evidence becomes a record and Corrections for challenges to published claims.