01
Step one: define the claim and its label
Start by writing the claim in one sentence and recording the label attached to it. Suppose a widely shared post says a city 'banned' plastic straws. The label is 'ban'; the claim is that selling them became illegal. Note where you saw it, the date, and the exact wording, since small changes in phrasing often change the verdict. Separate what is asserted from what is implied. This step keeps your page honest, because readers can see precisely what was tested rather than a vague topic, and it prevents drifting into a different argument halfway through.
02
Step two: trace sources and rate the evidence
Next, list the sources you checked in order of closeness to the event: the ordinance text, the council record, an official statement, then secondary coverage. In the straw example, the ordinance might restrict straws only at dine-in restaurants and allow them on request. Record what each source supports and where they disagree. Then explain your rating scale in plain words, such as supported, partly supported, misleading or unsupported, and show which evidence pushed the claim into its category. Readers should be able to follow the reasoning without trusting your conclusion on faith.
03
Step three: state limits and invite correction
Finish the page with what you could not confirm, the date you last checked, and a simple way for readers to submit better evidence. In the example, you might note that enforcement practice varied and that you did not review every local amendment. Add a short corrections policy describing how changes will be logged and marked. Then publish the whole sequence as a template: claim, label, sources, rating, limits. A reusable layout lets later pieces stay consistent, and it gives newsletter, podcast and classroom versions a shared method to cite.