Methodology: sourcing and verifying summit talks
Follow a summit claim to its original source, interpret review labels, check dates and quotations, and request a correction before citing a talk.
OnlineSummit's methodology connects a talk summary to the official material and the passage that supports it. A verified source establishes where a statement came from; it does not establish that the statement is true. Before citing a claim, check its source location, attribution and review status.
Trace the individual claim back to its context. A link to an event homepage alone cannot locate a statement.
What we record and which sources support it
The talk is our unit of research: who spoke, in what role at the time, at which summit, about which topic, and what they said. We aim to record the title, session type, date, duration and language, alongside an original summary, takeaways and individual claims with source locations. A speaker's later job change does not rewrite their affiliation at the time of the talk.
We use publicly available official material, with each source supporting a different part of the record:
- Official recordings establish what was said and provide the context around a timestamp.
- Agendas and session pages help establish the session title, scheduled date and speaker identity. An agenda cannot prove the wording of a delivered talk.
- Published slides and reports support what appears on a particular page. A slide's headline may omit qualifications stated aloud.
- Transcripts help locate passages; an exact quotation still needs wording that can be checked against the transcript or clear audio.
- Organizer releases and speakers' own published materials can supply context. Promotional assertions remain attributed company claims.
We index, summarize, structure and cite public material. We do not bypass logins, paywalls or access controls, or republish complete recordings, decks or transcripts.
How to read verification and review labels
Source verification, AI drafting and human review describe different work on a record. Read the source card and review disclosure together; a source badge alone does not mean an editor checked the summary.
Source Verified / Verified source means the primary source has been located and checked. It establishes source provenance, not independent confirmation of a speaker's argument or a company's performance claim.
AI Summarized identifies machine-drafted summaries, takeaways or extracted claims. AI disclosure does not establish human review. A page may instead show “Source available” when the source has not been marked verified.
Editorially Reviewed means a human editor has reviewed the record. Where human review is not recorded, the page says so. This label does not turn forecasts into outcomes or opinions into established facts.
Organizer Verified, when shown, means an authorized organizer representative has confirmed event-level material or the organizer relationship. That confirmation does not replace independent editorial review.
These checks answer separate questions. The diagram does not imply that every record has all four states.
Keep quotations, numbers and dates in context
An exact quote must be checkable word for word. Otherwise, our policy calls for a labeled paraphrase that preserves the speaker's meaning and uncertainty. A translation should be identified as a translation rather than presented as the speaker's original wording. The editorial policy sets out the rules for attribution and AI use.
For a statistic, follow the locator and retain the unit, comparison period and conditions given by the source. If the speaker reports a company result, attribute it to that speaker or company. A forecast remains a forecast even when the source is official. Do not fill missing conditions with assumptions.
Keep the session date, the source's publication or upload date, and the article's publication or modification date separate. A later upload does not establish when someone spoke. The source card separates the event date, source publication date and last check; an unverified date should remain unverified until supporting evidence is available.
Different date fields describe different events. Their order and spacing here are illustrative, not a claimed publication schedule.
A checklist before you cite a talk
Use the original passage to verify the claim you intend to reuse. On a talk page, work through these steps:
- Check the speaker's time-of-talk identity and the event or edition. Similar names and later affiliations can cause misattribution.
- Use Watch original or Open source record. Confirm the publisher and that the material matches the indexed session.
- Follow the relevant timestamp or page number and read or watch the surrounding context. Check whether the text is a quote, paraphrase, opinion, forecast or company claim.
- Read the AI disclosure and human-review state. If the passage, conditions or attribution cannot be confirmed, resolve the gap before using it as evidence.
- Use Cite for the reference, then retain the original source URL and the locator for the passage you used. Copying a citation does not perform the checks above.
Quality, samples and editorial independence
Pages that do not meet our content thresholds stay out of search-engine indexes. Indexability is a publication decision; it is not a guarantee that every field or statement has been independently confirmed.
Our sample-data policy requires fictional records to use a sample: ID and sample source status and remain excluded from search indexes. Samples must not use real company logos or attribute invented statements to real people or organizations. A sample may be replaced only by a separately verified record, never silently converted into evidence.
Search and featured placement use relevance, verification status, recency and explicit editorial selection. Payment, sponsorship and organizer participation do not buy ranking or favorable summaries. An official promotional statement still needs a company-claim label.
Report a gap or request a correction
Use the report page for an incorrect passage, identity error, broken source or rights request. Include the affected page URL, the exact passage or field, your proposed correction, and supporting primary material with a timestamp or page number. For a moved source, include both the old and replacement URLs and identify the publisher.
The report page provides separate email options for factual errors, corrections, speaker identity, rights requests and source replacements. Our stated response targets are acknowledgment of complete requests within 3 business days and resolution of straightforward metadata corrections normally within 7 business days. Complex disputes can take longer; credible urgent rights requests receive prompt review.
Method and sources
Updated October 2026. This page explains our existing source fields, review disclosures and citation controls, alongside the commitments in our editorial policy. It does not certify the completeness of every indexed record.
For external editorial context, Reuters' journalistic standards, consulted 18 October 2026, describe named attribution, contextual quotations, cross-checking and clear corrections. That reference explains general editorial principles; it is not a Reuters endorsement or a review of this site. Return to the OnlineSummit catalogue to find a talk, or report a source or citation problem.