MapleFind policy

Verification methodology

How sourced facts move from external evidence into a reviewed public directory record.

Implementation review: July 26, 2026

Launch note

This policy reflects the controls implemented in the current platform and must be reviewed against the final legal entity, vendors, data flows, and province-specific obligations before production publication.

Source hierarchy

Official business websites and authoritative public records are preferred for core facts. Official social profiles can support identity. Third-party directories can help discovery but are not automatically authoritative.

Fact-level provenance

The ingestion schema supports a source ID, observed time, content hash, source type, fact set, conflicts, verification state, and pipeline version. Public WordPress content stores the reviewed fact and compact provenance pointers, not the raw capture.

Unknowns and conflicts

Unknown facts stay unknown. Conflicting phone numbers, locations, origin claims, or statuses are surfaced for review. Summaries must remain faithful to supported facts and may not invent hours, reviews, ratings, awards, addresses, or certifications.

Visible states

Listings can be unverified, source checked, owner verified, stale, or disputed. A freshness date shows when the record was last checked; it is not a guarantee that every fact remains current.

Human publication

The integration role can create and edit its own unpublished records but cannot publish. An editor reviews the real front-end preview, sources, taxonomy assignments, link status, and public value before publication.

Reverification

Material corrections, owner claims, source failures, age thresholds, and reported conflicts trigger re-review. Stale or disputed facts are labelled, suppressed, or removed rather than silently presented as current.

You can change these choices at any time. MapleFind currently ships without third-party analytics or behavioural advertising scripts; these controls gate any future integrations.