CANDID REFERENCE: "what to source" checklist — Must / Should / Doesn't need

The Candid "what needs sourcing" decision matrix.

Must source

• Statistics, percentages, dollar amounts, dates, counts
• Direct or paraphrased quotes from named people/organizations
• Attributions to "studies" / "research" / "experts" (FTC trigger — see FTC reasonable-basis doctrine: advertisers must possess "the amount and type of substantiation the ad actually communicates")
• Claims about competitors, vendors, regulators, platforms
• Historical events, regulatory rules, technical specs, industry standards
• Performance claims ("X% faster" — FTC-actionable)
• Contested or non-obvious claims
• Anything that, if wrong, damages a person/company/reader

Should source

• Industry-consensus statements with specific numbers
• Best-practice recommendations from named experts
• Definitions where multiple definitions exist

Doesn't require sourcing

• Common knowledge ("Kitchener-Waterloo is in Ontario")
• Clearly labeled author opinions (CANDID REFERENCE: 7-label confidence taxonomy — Verified / Industry-consensus / Single-source / Estimated / Author's view / Contested / Stale: Author's view)
• Clearly framed first-hand experience
• Generic descriptions of your own services (subject to FTC truthfulness/substantiation if comparative)
• Things the reader can verify by looking at the page

The test

If a skeptical reader asks "where did that come from?" and you can't answer in one sentence with a name and a date, it needs sourcing.

See RULE: Every objective claim in Candid content carries a named source + date + verbatim quote ≤25 words + confidence label for the operational rule that enforces this.