ambacti
Explore workflows

FACT REVIEW · Workflow idea

Find claims that deserve a closer look before a draft is trusted.

Provide a draft and the facts your team has already verified. Review the draft sentence by sentence, identify statements that may not be supported by the supplied material, and prepare a short findings summary with the original wording available for an editor to check.

Make it yours See how it works ↓
A Roman aqueduct taking shape from architectural sketch to marble.
A little structure. A clearer outcome.
Starts with
Draft and verified reference facts
Produces
A review summary that identifies statements needing source checks while keeping the original draft and reference facts available.
Category
Reviews & approvals

01 / The starting point

A clear request.
A useful direction.

Text submitted by an editor alongside facts checked against trusted sources

“Compare draft statements with supplied facts, flag possible conflicts or gaps, and leave accuracy judgments and publication approval to a human reviewer.”
An example request · Make it specific to your team.

02 / The work

5 tasks.
One useful outcome.

Helps editors find factual statements that need additional checking against trusted source material.

  1. Choose the draft and its purpose

    Select text the team is authorized to review and note whether it is internal, customer-facing, or intended for publication.

  2. Provide source-checked reference facts

    Gather current, relevant facts and retain their original sources so a reviewer can inspect the evidence.

  3. Compare individual statements

    Check each factual statement against the supplied material and mark unsupported, conflicting, or unclear claims for review.

  4. Prepare a findings summary

    List the statements that need attention and distinguish a possible concern from a confirmed error.

  5. Verify sensitive claims with a person

    Have an editor check original evidence and require a qualified reviewer for claims about identity, safety, or security before any decision or publication.

03 / The result

Something useful.
Something to build on.

A review summary that identifies statements needing source checks while keeping the original draft and reference facts available.

AmbactiWorkflow folio · 5 steps

Check draft claims against verified facts

Reviews & approvals · Example outcome

The handoff

A review summary that identifies statements needing source checks while keeping the original draft and reference facts available.

Keep in mind

A mismatch does not prove a statement is false, and a match does not prove it is true. Review original sources, dates, context, and uncertainty. Have a qualified person verify sensitive claims involving identity, safety, or security and approve any consequential use or publication.

04 / Make it yours

Set the brief.
Set the standard.

A few choices shape the work around your team.

Define suitable documents and reviewers

Choose the kinds of drafts in scope and identify editors responsible for checking them.

Require reliable, dated source facts

Keep references and their dates with the facts so reviewers can check whether the comparison is relevant and current.

Set privacy and sensitive-topic limits

Avoid unnecessary personal or confidential details and identify claims that require a qualified human review.

Test supported, unsupported, and uncertain claims

Check direct matches, contradictions, and missing context to ensure findings remain tentative until a person verifies them.

Put your next idea to work.

Start with your brief. Make the process your own.

Explore more workflows ↗