A detail that seems obvious today can become hard to interpret later. A page changes. A name appears in a different context. A colleague asks what led you to a conclusion.
Keeping the source close to the observation helps preserve the reasoning behind the work.
Record what you actually saw
Start with a specific observation. Include the source address, the date you accessed it, and enough surrounding context to explain what the material shows. If you retain a copy, follow the requirements that apply to your work.
Separate observation from interpretation
“Two pages list the same business address” is an observation. “These businesses are connected” is an interpretation that may need more support. Writing them separately makes the strength of the reasoning easier to assess.
Leave room for another explanation
Ask what else could explain the detail. An address might be a shared office. A repeated name might refer to different people. A timestamp might reflect an update rather than the original publication.
Make the next question visible
End the note with what would help confirm or challenge your interpretation. This gives the next research step a purpose and makes it easier to resume the work.
A clear research trail does not remove uncertainty. It makes uncertainty easier to see, discuss, and investigate.
← Back to the journal