CANDID REFERENCE: 7-label confidence taxonomy — Verified / Industry-consensus / Single-source / Estimated / Author's view / Contested / Stale
The canonical Candid Creative confidence-label taxonomy. Every existing KB entry uses an informal version of this; this entry is the formal source-of-truth going forward.
| Label | Definition | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Verified | Primary source quoted directly; URL + date + verbatim quote ≤25 words; re-checked within 6 months. | "BBC requires sourcing 'as appropriate to subject and nature' (BBC §3.2.2, 2019 ed.; verified May 2026)." |
| Industry-consensus | Multiple independent reputable sources concur; no authoritative contradiction. | "Core Web Vitals influence ranking. (Google Search Central + multiple 2024-2025 industry studies.)" |
| Single-source | One credible source, not yet corroborated. | "Wikipedia is 7.8% of ChatGPT citations. (Profound, 680M citations Aug 2024-Jun 2025.)" |
| Estimated | Author's calculation/synthesis from data; not a direct citation. | "AI Overviews appeared in 88.1% of informational queries at initial measurement; share has since shifted (Semrush, 2025)." |
| Author's view | Opinion, recommendation, or interpretation. | "We recommend KB-backed sites over brochure builds. (Author's view.)" |
| Contested | Reputable sources disagree. | "Whether E-E-A-T is a direct ranking factor is contested. (Google: no. Some SEOs: yes.)" |
| Stale / under review | Was Verified/Industry-consensus, source >18 months old, awaiting re-check. | "Link-rot rate in legal citations was ~50% after a decade (Zittrain 2014 — methodology likely still valid)." |
Lineage
The 3-tier base (High / Moderate / Low confidence) comes from the US Intelligence Community — see US Intelligence Community: high/moderate/low confidence taxonomy (ICD 203/206, 2007 NIE Iran convention). The 7-label Candid adaptation extends with:
- Estimated — bridges the gap between Industry-consensus and Single-source when the writer is doing arithmetic on cited inputs
- Author's view — makes opinions visibly opinions, not stealth-sourced claims
- Contested — explicitly distinguishes "honest disagreement among credible sources" from "no good source"
- Stale — the time-decay label that turns the KB into a living document (RULE: Every public Candid artifact carries a visible "last updated" stamp. Living-document discipline beats one-shot publication.)
How to apply
Use these labels inline at the research stage (Stage 1 of Reference framework: Research-first workflow — 5 stages (Capture → Foundation → Synthesis → Article → Marketing page → Maintain)). In derived public articles, the labels get smoothed into prose ("according to verified sources" / "industry estimates suggest") but the underlying KB entry preserves the explicit label. Marketing pages link back to the article; reader pursuing one click sees the labeled source.
The seven-label discipline is the operational expression of Wikipedia: "The threshold for inclusion is verifiability, not truth" — four claim types always need inline citations for business writing.
Depends on
- reference US Intelligence Community: high/moderate/low confidence taxonomy (ICD 203/206, 2007 NIE Iran convention)
- reference Devon Zuegel: epistemic-status labels are "a hack in order to publish half-baked ideas I'd otherwise not feel comfortable sharing"
- reference Wikipedia: "The threshold for inclusion is verifiability, not truth" — four claim types always need inline citations
Referenced by (4)
- reference CANDID REFERENCE: "what to source" checklist — Must / Should / Doesn't need depends-on
- reference CANDID REFERENCE: how the 15-brief foundation roadmap connects — the throughline from strategic frame to editorial layer depends-on
- rule RULE: Every objective claim in Candid content carries a named source + date + verbatim quote ≤25 words + confidence label depends-on
- reference Research brief: Confidence Levels, Sources, and Dated Claims — why every statement on a credible site should be verifiable (piece 15 of 15) relates-to