Keep conflicting sources visible until resolved
When two applicable sources disagree, choosing the more convenient one is not verification.
The distinction that matters
First compare scope, version, effective date and the field being described. One source may concern another currency, stage or account type. If the disagreement remains after those checks, mark the claim as conflicting and avoid a definitive numeric comparison. Preserve both references and ask the responsible provider for clarification.
A worked example
One fictional help page says a method has a C$10 minimum; another dated document says C$20 for the same direction and currency. Averaging to C$15 creates a rule neither source states. A conflict notice accurately communicates the evidence while the discrepancy is investigated.
Your next steps
- Check scope before calling it a contradiction.
- Retain both dated references.
- Suspend unsupported conclusions.
- Record the provider's clarification and which version it identifies.
Where this answer stops
The presence of a conflict does not itself prove deception or a policy breach. Northline does not resolve legal precedence between documents. It should show the uncertainty rather than quietly prefer a more attractive value.
Sources & reading
Original Northline explanation. Worked examples use stated assumptions; they do not establish an operator’s policy or predict personal results. Read how we handle evidence.
An editorial review date is not a new policy effective date. Always check the current source for operator-specific conditions.
Suggest a correction