Journalists
Research accelerator for verifying claims before publishing
About & MethodologyFact checking Nepal's news,
Fact checking Nepal's news,
one claim at a time
Sachilo is an independent, evidence-first fact-checking platform built for Nepal. We don't tell you what to believe. We find the sources, weigh the evidence, and show our work so you can decide for yourself whether a story holds up.
0
Pipeline stages
0
Source tiers
0
Verdict levels
0+
Gov domains
Why Sachilo exists
Nepal has hundreds of online news portals. Stories get copied, rewritten, and shared across social media in minutes, often without verification. A claim made in a press conference in Singha Durbar can travel through a dozen outlets before anyone checks whether the numbers add up.
Traditional fact-checking is slow. Newsrooms have limited staff and competing deadlines. By the time a correction runs, the original claim has already shaped public opinion. We built Sachilo because Nepal deserved a system that could check claims at the speed they spread, transparently, and without editorial bias.
Who this is for
Anyone reading Nepali news online. You don't need a journalism degree to use Sachilo. If you've ever read a headline and thought "is that actually true?" — paste the link, and we'll show you what the evidence says.
Researchers
Audit media narratives with structured, citable evidence
Everyone else
Cut through noise before sharing a story on social media
How it works
You submit a news article URL. Within minutes, a five-stage pipeline processes the article end to end. Each stage feeds the next, building toward a final evidence-backed verdict:
Reading
~8sWe grab the article, strip out the ads and clutter, and pull just the text that matters.
Under the hood
Some news sites make this harder than it should be. If our first pass can't get through, we switch to a browser-based approach. Most Nepali portals work on the first try; the stubborn ones get a second shot automatically.
How sources are ranked
Not all sources are equal. A Nepal Government gazette carries more weight than an anonymous Facebook post, and our scoring reflects that. Every piece of evidence is assigned to one of four tiers, which directly influences how much it moves the needle on a verdict.
Official government, regulator, court, election, central bank, treaty body, or primary document sources.
gov.npec.gov.npmohp.gov.npgov.ukusa.govwho.intun.orgeuropa.eucanada.ca
National daily newspaper portals with public editorial accountability, major global wires, and broadcasters.
bbc.comreuters.comapnews.comkathmandupost.comhimalkhabar.comtechpana.comnepalfactcheck.org
Smaller news sites, specialist portals, and identifiable local outlets. Useful for leads and context.
ratopati.comnagariknews.comujyaaloonline.combizmandu.comekantipur.comonlinekhabar.comsetopati.com
Anonymous blogs, content farms, copied articles, or social-only pages without clear editorial accountability.
unsourced postsunverified social pages
Higher weight = more influence on the final verdict.
Evidence strength
Every verdict shows an evidence strength percentage. This isn't a "confidence score" pulled from thin air; it's a weighted calculation based on the volume, tier, and stance of sources we actually found.
Three government sites and two wire services all say the same thing? That's a strong signal. The more independent, high-tier sources point the same direction, the higher this number climbs.
We searched and came up short. Maybe the claim is too new, too local, or just undocumented. Rather than guess, we label it UNVERIFIED and tell you why the evidence wasn't there.
What we will not say
Language matters. Words like "fake news" or"propaganda" assume intent we often cannot prove, and they shut down conversation rather than opening it. Our reports describe what evidence shows, never what motives we suspect. These terms are banned from all Sachilo verdicts:
- fake
- false
- lie
- hoax
- misinformation
- disinformation
- propaganda
Instead, every verdict uses exactly one of six evidence-based labels:
- True
- Mostly True
- Mixture
- Mostly False
- False
- Unverified
What makes Sachilo different
Most fact-checking operations depend on a small team manually investigating one story at a time. That model works but it doesn't scale, especially in a media landscape where dozens of claims circulate daily across Nepali, English, and regional-language portals.
Sachilo automates the evidence retrieval and weighing process while keeping the output human-readable and auditable. We don't replace editorial judgment; we give it better raw material to work with, faster. Every verdict is open for public correction, every source is linked, and every scoring formula is documented on this page.
- No paywall. No registration to read verdicts.
- No editorial board deciding which stories matter.
- If a URL contains checkable claims, anyone can submit it.
Corrections & accountability
We will get things wrong. When that happens, we want to know. Every published verdict has a "Request correction" button. Corrections are reviewed by a human editor, not automatically overwritten.
When a verdict changes, the original is preserved with a visible strike-through and a dated correction note. We don't quietly edit history. The correction record is part of the verdict, permanently.
Who built this
Sachilo is built by an independent team of journalists, engineers, and researchers based in Kathmandu. We have no political affiliation, no media-house ownership, and no advertiser influence over verdicts.
The project is self-funded and operates without external editorial oversight. Our only obligation is to the evidence.
Get in touch
Found an error in a verdict? Have a partnership proposal? Want to report a bug? hello@sachilo.com · Contact form