1914-1918-online.net

Key factors

• + Academic institutional affiliation — The .net domain combined with the naming convention suggests this is an established academic digital humanities project, likely affiliated with university institutions. Academic projects typically maintain rigorous peer-review and verification standards.
• + Specialized subject matter (WWI history) — Focus on a specific historical period indicates specialized expertise rather than broad generalist news coverage. Subject experts curate content with primary source documentation.
• + Digital humanities project methodology — Digital history projects employ transparent citation practices, source attribution, and archival standards. Primary documents are typically digitized with provenance information.
• • Not a news organization — This is a historical resource, not a news wire or journalism outlet. Credibility assessment criteria differ from news organizations—success metrics are historical accuracy and source rigor rather than timeliness.
• − Limited public transparency on governance — Without direct access to the site's masthead and editorial policies, specific information about editorial board composition, funding sources, and corrections procedures cannot be verified.

Editorial standards

While specific editorial policies cannot be confirmed without site access, academic digital history projects typically employ: (1) Primary source verification and archival citation practices, (2) Peer review by subject matter experts, (3) Transparent attribution of documents and interpretations, (4) Separation of primary sources from scholarly interpretation, (5) Collaborative editorial oversight through academic institutional affiliation. Standards would align with digital humanities and historical scholarship norms rather than journalism standards.

Fact-checking

As an academic digital history project rather than a news organization, this resource is not tracked by major fact-checking organizations (Snopes, FactCheck.org, PolitiFact). Credibility is assessed through scholarly peer-review and source documentation standards rather than journalistic fact-checking. Historical accuracy is maintained through archival methodology and expert curation.