Methodology checklist
Supplier Profile Source-Review Checklist
Use each source for the field it can support, record its date and scope, and keep unsupported supplier conclusions unresolved.
Checklist scope
Published: 11 August 2026. This reusable checklist consolidates the current methodology, Sources and Limitations page, identity Guides and source conventions used in the three published Supplier Profiles.
It does not assign a source score and does not convert a public record into supplier verification or a recommendation.
What each source may support
Record the exact field, source type, page, review date and scope instead of applying one source label to the whole company.
| Source type | What it may support | What it does not automatically prove | Source reviewed | Review date | Field / conclusion supported |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Company-published source | What the company publicly states about its names, products, facilities, capabilities, brands or contact routes. | Independent confirmation of the claim; current capacity, quality, order performance, price, MOQ or willingness to accept an order. | |||
| Official registry or filing | Registered legal name, registration identifier, status, address, directors or filing facts within the record’s date and scope. | Current operating capability, product quality, factory ownership, commercial reliability or suitability for an order. | |||
| Public product page | That the reviewed website publicly displays or describes the product or category on the review date. | Current production, stock, capacity, price, market-version availability or acceptance of a buyer’s specification. | |||
| Certification or document source | The holder, applicant, model, factory, standard, market and dates actually shown within the document or official lookup. | That the quoted model, every variant, current factory or destination-market version is covered without a field-by-field match. | |||
| Marketplace or directory | A dated commercial listing, account name, product display or discovery clue. | Legal identity, manufacturing role, ownership of the listed products, current availability or independent verification. | |||
| Third-party media or database | A dated statement, reported event, structured record or lead for further checking, with its source type retained. | That repeated copies are independent confirmations, or that an unscoped company description proves the current order role. |
Field-level review questions
- Does the source identify the relevant legal entity, or only a public name, brand or website account?
- Is the information current enough for the conclusion, and is the review date recorded?
- Does the source cover the exact product, model, site, market or time period being discussed?
- Is a company claim still labelled as company-published information?
- Do two sources represent genuinely different source groups, or are they copies of the same underlying statement?
- Have different values, missing information and order-specific questions remained visible?
Conclusion boundary
A source can be useful without proving the entire supplier relationship. Registry details do not prove capacity or quality. A product page does not prove current order acceptance. A certificate does not cover the quoted version until holder, model, factory, market and date are matched. A marketplace listing is a discovery clue, not factory verification.