How TVK Tracker verifies sources

The strongest sources for this site are official public records: Election Commission documents, government orders, department releases, Assembly records, court documents, official press releases, and public budget documents. These sources are not perfect, but they are usually the best starting point because they show the formal record that public institutions are willing to stand behind.

When a tracker entry relies on an official source, the summary should still remain careful. An official announcement can prove that something was announced, but it may not prove that the policy has reached people. That is why the tracker distinguishes between announcements, implementation steps, and completed outcomes.

Political developments often become public first through established news organizations. TVK Tracker uses those reports to record developments such as alliances, resignations, court proceedings, speeches, protests, cabinet changes, and criticism from opposition parties. The site does not republish full articles. It writes its own short summary and links readers back to the original publisher for the full report.

If a story is sensitive, disputed, or dependent on anonymous sourcing, it should be labelled with caution. A media report may be enough to include a development in the timeline, but not enough to mark a promise as implemented or a claim as proven.

If two credible sources conflict, TVK Tracker should avoid pretending certainty. The entry should say what is known, what is disputed, and what stronger evidence would settle the issue. When possible, official documents should be checked against multiple established reports. If no reliable confirmation is available, the status should remain Needs Verification or No Public Update Yet.

Corrections matter because political information changes quickly. A later court order, government clarification, budget document, or election record can change the status of an older page. The correction process exists so readers can send better sources and so the site can update without quietly rewriting history.

A review date tells readers when the tracker last checked the entry. It does not mean the source itself was published on that date. This is especially useful for promises because a promise may remain unchanged for months, while the tracker may still review it periodically to see whether new evidence has appeared.

For reader trust, visible review dates also make the site feel maintained rather than auto-generated. They show that a human editorial process is checking whether the public record has changed.