Write down the claim first
Identify exactly what you want to know: who holds an office, whether someone appears on a ballot, what a committee reported spending, or how a member voted on a question. Each claim calls for a different source. A biography, a campaign website and a financial report can all be useful without answering the same question.
Keep identity, scope and date together
Record the entity identifier, jurisdiction, election or reporting period and source publication. These details prevent a correct fact from being attached to the wrong person, place or time. A name-only match can be misleading, especially when campaigns or institutions have changed names or when a person has sought several offices.
Separate source text from interpretation
An official filing, published question or recorded vote establishes what that document says. Explaining its significance is a further step. Electionpedia keeps original facts and source links alongside its explanatory material so a reader can inspect both. A correction should identify the specific field and the stronger source, rather than simply proposing a preferred conclusion.
Leave uncertainty visible in your own notes
No single directory contains every public document. An absent record is not a proof of absence, and a source being official does not make every possible inference from it correct. Continue to the responsible agency when the question requires current legal status, certified ballot information or a complete record. Preserve the source’s own limitations when sharing a finding.
Continue with the sources
These publications explain the institutions and record systems discussed in this guide. Individual entries link their own specific documents and dates.