Fact-Checking Methodology

Last updated: 12 November 2026

A biography is only as good as its facts. This page explains, step by step, how every profile on Top Personalities is researched, checked and reviewed before it is published — and what happens when the sources disagree.

The four fact statuses

Every factual claim in a profile carries one of four statuses. These are the labels readers see on the page:

• Verified — confirmed by at least two independent reliable sources.
• Interpretation — a reasoned reading of the evidence (for example, the significance of an achievement), clearly labelled as interpretation rather than fact.
• Disputed — reliable sources disagree. The profile shows both perspectives, with their sources, and does not silently pick one side.
• Unconfirmed — not established well enough to publish. Unconfirmed claims are never published as fact.

Step 1 — Research from reliable sources

Each profile is researched from reliable sources, starting with reference works, official records and reputable publications — for example Encyclopaedia Britannica, official foundation and institutional pages, NobelPrize.org for laureates, and established news and historical sources. Wikipedia is used as a starting point and a cross-check only, never as the sole source for a fact. The full source hierarchy is set out in our Sources Policy.

Step 2 — At least three sources per profile

No profile is published with fewer than three independent sources, and key facts — birth and death dates and places, major achievements, and anything contentious — must be confirmed by at least two of them. A source that merely repeats another source does not count as independent. Every profile page lists its sources so readers can check our work.

Step 3 — Second review before publication

The author, Abdul Hannan, drafts each profile; a second check with AI assistance then verifies the facts against the cited sources before the profile can be published. The date each profile was last verified is shown on the profile page. A profile that fails review stays a draft — drafts are never published, and no public page is created for them.

Step 4 — Disagreements are shown, not hidden

When reliable sources disagree — about a birth year, a date, or the facts of an event — the profile presents both versions with their sources, and records the disagreement in its verification notes. A single value is used in the main text only where the weight of evidence clearly supports it, and the alternative is still shown. We never silently pick the more convenient figure.

Step 5 — What we do not publish

We do not publish net-worth figures as our own content: reported fortunes change daily and disagree wildly between sources. We do not publish quotations that cannot be traced to a reliable, attributable source. We do not publish speculative private information, unverified contentious claims or guesses about living people. And where reliable information simply does not exist, the page says "Not reliably documented" — a gap is always better than an invention.

Living people get extra checks

Profiles of living people go through the same process with stricter review: contentious claims need high-quality sources, personal details need to be widely published and relevant, and the profile is re-checked as new reliable information appears. See our Editorial Policy for the living-person rules.

After publication — re-verification and corrections

Publication is not the end of fact-checking. Profiles are re-verified when new reliable information appears, and the "last verified" date on the page is updated. Readers can report errors by email to [email protected] — every report is logged, verified errors are corrected on the page, and significant corrections are noted. Our Corrections Policy explains the process. General questions can be sent via our Contact page, and the wider standards behind this methodology are on the About page.