How we grade the evidence
Every attribution on this site carries two separate grades: an evidence tier (how strong the underlying source is) and a status (how sure we are of the maker). They are different axes — a source can be high-tier yet indirect, or low-tier yet name a maker outright. Here is the rubric, and the language it holds us to.
The six evidence tiers
Best evidence first. The tier grades the source, not our confidence.
How status maps to language
Status follows the source, and the wording follows the status. A claim is only confirmed when a tier 1–4 source directly names the maker for that exact product; probable when the evidence is strong but indirect; rumored when only tier 6 community reporting exists; and unknown when nothing at tiers 1–5 holds up. These four phrasings are the only ones we use:
“is manufactured by X, per [the recall notice / TTB record / court filing]” — a plain statement, always with the source.
“evidence indicates / points to X” — never “is made by X” as a bare fact.
“is rumored (unverified) to be made by X” — shown, but never stated as the maker in a heading or fact sentence.
“no reliable public evidence identifies the manufacturer” — no guessing, and no company named.
Corrections policy
We would rather be corrected than wrong. Substantiated corrections are made promptly, and the change is noted in the change log with its date — the same record we keep for every supplier switch.
Spot an error or have a primary source we missed? Email hello@whoreallymakes.com with the product and the source, and we’ll verify it.