Record the evidence behind every product recommendation.

01 · Start with the claim

Make the recommendation checkable, not just plausible.

Begin with the precise statement a reader will encounter: a price, feature, limitation, comparison value, or “best for” recommendation. A broad note such as “the product page was reviewed” is difficult to audit. The exact wording gives a later editor something concrete to re-check and makes it easier to notice when a source no longer supports the published claim.

Keep the record beside the content item it supports. If one recommendation has several material claims, give each claim its own record or clearly list every claim covered by the same evidence.

02 · Use one record shape

Capture the context an editor will need later.

Use the fields below for every claim or recommendation. The prompts are a blank template: fill them from the source you actually reviewed, and leave a limitation visible when the source cannot answer a question.

Claim or recommendation

Copy the exact sentence, comparison value, or recommendation being supported. Include the version of the wording that appears on the page.

Source and location

Name the source, page, document, account, or conversation. Add a URL or internal reference and the specific section, field, or passage an editor should revisit.

Captured and reviewed

Record when the evidence was captured, who captured it, and when another editor last reviewed the record. Use an unambiguous date and time zone when timing matters.

Applicability

State who and what the evidence applies to: market, audience, plan, product version, device, location, date range, or other conditions that change the meaning.

Limitations

Write what the evidence does not establish, what may have changed, and which assumptions or gaps should prevent stronger wording.

Next review decision

Choose keep, revise, qualify, or hold. Add the next review date, an owner, and the event that should trigger an earlier check.

03 · Re-check before updating

Let the record determine the next editorial action.

When a page is due for an update, compare the published wording with the saved record and then revisit the source. Decide whether to keep the wording, revise it, qualify it with its limits, or hold the recommendation until better evidence is available. Record the decision and date so the review leaves a useful trail.

• The record contains the exact claim or recommendation, not only a topic such as “pricing.”
• Another editor can find the source and the precise passage or field that supports the wording.
• Capture and review timing are visible, including the person responsible for the last review.
• Applicability and limitations make clear where the evidence does and does not fit.
• The wording is no stronger than the evidence: uncertainty is qualified rather than filled with an assumption.
• A next review decision, owner, date, and earlier-review trigger are recorded.

04 · Keep the record useful

Review on a date and on a change.

A calendar date creates a predictable maintenance habit, while a change trigger catches important updates sooner. Choose both: a next review date and events such as a changed offer, product version, policy, audience, source, or page wording. If the team cannot confirm that a claim still applies, make that uncertainty part of the decision instead of silently carrying the old recommendation forward.