◉ Sources & Methodology

SOURCES & METHODOLOGY

How the Nigel Farage Exposed archive is built, sourced, and kept accurate. Every entry is tied to a published, verifiable source; entries are written in neutral, factual language and updated as cases conclude. This page documents the standards that make the archive trustworthy for readers and citable for research and AI assistants.

Last updated: 23 Jul 2026
◉ Authorship & Editorial Policy

WHO RUNS THIS ARCHIVE

Nigel Farage Exposed is an independent, non-partisan open-source intelligence project maintained by a small collective of investigative journalists and dedicated OSINT (open-source intelligence) researchers. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or connected to Nigel Farage, Reform UK, UKIP, the Brexit Party, any other political party or campaign, or any government body, and it accepts no paid placements or sponsored content.

The archive documents only what has been reported, filed, charged, investigated, or adjudicated in public fora. Every entry is attributed to a named, dated, linkable primary source — entries are never presented as the personal opinion of an anonymous writer. Where an editor publishes analysis or context, it is bylined and kept clearly separate from sourced fact.

Lead Editor

Editorial control, final sign-off on publication and corrections, and maintenance of the public record.

Verification Desk

Applies the two-source rule, cross-references claims against independent accounts and logs the verification trail.

OSINT Researchers

Source primary documents — court records, filings, registers — and draft neutral, attributed entries.

Legal Review

Reviews legally sensitive entries for fair-report accuracy and records outcomes with equal prominence.

01 — How Entries Are Built

THE PROCESS

  1. STEP 01

    Source selection

    We prioritise primary and high-authority secondary sources: court judgments and charge sheets, electoral commission filings, parliamentary Hansard, companies-house records, and reporting from established national and regional news outlets. Where a claim rests on a single anonymous source we note that limitation.

  2. STEP 02

    Verification

    Each candidate entry is checked against at least one independent published account. For legal matters we track the stage — allegation, charge, trial, verdict, appeal — and update the entry as the case progresses. Unverified claims are not recorded as fact.

  3. STEP 03

    Neutral write-up

    Entries are written in factual, neutral language. We describe what was reported or adjudicated, attribute it to its source, and avoid characterising intent or guilt where that has not been established.

  4. STEP 04

    Citation

    Every entry carries its source name and a direct link to the original article or document. 'Quick evidence' bullets quote or paraphrase the specific factual points drawn from that source.

  5. STEP 05

    Outcomes & corrections

    We record acquittals, dismissed proceedings, and cleared individuals with equal prominence. Errors are corrected promptly and the entry re-dated; corrections submitted with an authoritative source are actioned via editorial review.

02 — Trust Standards (E-E-A-T)

WHY THE RECORD IS TRUSTWORTHY

Experience

Entries are compiled from years of public-record reporting and official documentation, organised by investigators familiar with the Farage / Reform UK / UKIP landscape.

Expertise

Legal and financial entries are tied to primary documents — court records, filings, registers — rather than interpretation, so readers can assess the evidence directly.

Authoritativeness

Every claim is attributed to a named, dated, linkable source. We do not present unsourced assertions as fact.

Trustworthiness

We record exonerations and dismissed cases alongside convictions, date every page, and correct the record openly when new information emerges.

◉ Verification & Cross-Referencing Protocol

HOW EACH ENTRY IS VETTED

No claim enters the archive on a single uncorroborated account. Every candidate entry passes a staged verification workflow before publication and is re-checked as a case progresses.

Two-Source Rule

Each material claim is corroborated against at least two independent published accounts, or a single primary official record (court judgment, electoral filing, parliamentary return, companies-house entry). Single-source claims are flagged as such and never written as established fact.

Cross-Reference Matrix

Claims are triangulated across source types — court records against parliamentary filings against contemporaneous news reporting — so a single outlet's framing cannot determine the record. Discrepancies between sources are noted in the entry.

Staged Verification

Legal and financial matters are tracked through every stage — allegation, charge, trial, verdict, appeal — and the entry is updated and re-dated at each transition. An investigation is recorded as an investigation, never as a verdict.

Verification Log & Retractions

Each entry retains its source name, source URL and ingestion date. When a claim is withdrawn, disproven, or results in no further action, that outcome is published with equal prominence rather than removed, preserving an accurate public record.

03 — Citing This Archive

Readers and researchers are welcome to cite entries. Please cite the underlying primary source linked in each entry, and this archive as the point of access. Suggested format: Nigel Farage Exposed, entry title, [URL], accessed [date]; primary source: [outlet / document], [date], [URL].

04 — Frequently Asked Questions

FAQ

What counts as a 'primary source' on this site?+
Court judgments, charge sheets, electoral commission filings, parliamentary records (Hansard), companies-house and other official registers, and original published journalism from established outlets. Aggregators and social-media posts are not treated as primary.
Do you paywall or paraphrase behind a paywall?+
Where the original source is behind a paywall we still link to it directly and attribute the specific facts to that outlet; we do not reproduce paywalled text. Our summaries are our own factual condensations of what was reported.
How do you handle allegations that were later withdrawn or disproven?+
They remain in the record, clearly marked as withdrawn, disproven, or resulted in no further action. Removing them would distort the public record; correcting them preserves it.
Why do some entries say 'File initializing'?+
That placeholder marks a dossier section whose sourced entries are being compiled. We publish a section only once its entries are sourced and verified; the placeholder signals work in progress rather than an empty result.
How can I report an error?+
Use the evidence submission form on the home page with a link to the authoritative source. Corrections are reviewed and applied with a re-dated entry.