# Find reviewable professional profiles from defined public evidence

[← All data workflows](https://proxylane.dev/use-cases)  

PEOPLE SOURCING · WORKFLOW GUIDE

  

ProxyLane can scope a pilot for recruiting operations or sourcing-tool builders who provide a target brief and permitted sources. Each proposed profile keeps its evidence URL and observation time, while identity ambiguity stays in review.

 

**Founder, ProxyLane**Sample data and implementation guide

 

On this page  [Workflow at a glance](https://proxylane.dev/use-cases/people-sourcing#workflow)   [Sample data](https://proxylane.dev/use-cases/people-sourcing#sample)   [Who this fits](https://proxylane.dev/use-cases/people-sourcing#who-this-fits)   [What the pilot proposes](https://proxylane.dev/use-cases/people-sourcing#what-the-pilot-proposes)   [Try the sample locally](https://proxylane.dev/use-cases/people-sourcing#try-the-sample-locally)   [Data requirements and economics](https://proxylane.dev/use-cases/people-sourcing#data-requirements-and-economics)   [Questions buyers usually ask](https://proxylane.dev/use-cases/people-sourcing#questions-buyers-usually-ask)   [Request access](https://proxylane.dev/use-cases/people-sourcing#request)

 

**Get the data you need**

Share your sources and required fields to discuss access for this workflow.

 [Request access ↗](https://proxylane.dev/use-cases/people-sourcing#request)

  

## Workflow at a glance

 

1. ### Define the target

Share the role, organization or geography, permitted public sources, required fields, refresh interval and output format
 
1. ### Check identity evidence

Review profile URLs, role and organization evidence, dates, duplicate possibilities and records that cannot be resolved safely
 
1. ### Accept the file

Agree the permitted-use, deletion and correction rules; if the pilot is feasible, accepted rows and a separate review queue can then be defined

 

SYNTHETIC SCHEMA EXAMPLE

## Sample data

 

The downloadable synthetic sample shows one accepted public professional record and one record held for review because identity evidence is incomplete. These fictional records demonstrate the format, not measured service output.

 

```json
{
    "profile_url": "https://example.com/profiles/ava-lane",
    "role": "Synthetic Data Platform Lead",
    "organization": "Example Harbor Labs",
    "observed_at": "2026-09-17T00:00:00Z",
    "evidence_url": "https://example.com/profiles/ava-lane",
    "match_status": "accepted"
}
```

 

[Download JSON](https://proxylane.dev/use-cases/people-sourcing/sample.json)   [Download CSV](https://proxylane.dev/use-cases/people-sourcing/sample.csv)   [Requirements worksheet](https://proxylane.dev/use-cases/people-sourcing/pilot-brief.md)

 

## Who this fits

 

This is for recruiting operations teams with a defined role brief or builders testing a sourcing workflow from public professional evidence. It fits a process that wants profile URLs, role and organization observations, source dates and an explicit identity review queue before a recruiter acts.

 

It does not fit a job-board listing feed, a personal contact database, inferred sensitive traits, automated suitability scoring, or a claim that a person consented to a particular use. People sourcing is about public professional evidence tied to a possible identity; job listings describe openings and are a different input and output.

 

## What the pilot proposes

 

The current public offer is a pilot scoping conversation and illustrative downloads. No managed service or delivery result is being claimed. Select **Request access** to open a draft addressed to  [hello@proxylane.dev](mailto:hello@proxylane.dev) , then review it with the role, organization or geography, requested source list, required fields, refresh interval, output format, expected volume and acceptance rules. Opening the button sends nothing; a human reviews feasibility, scope, price and acceptance criteria before any work or purchase terms are agreed.

 

| Field | Proposed rule | Acceptance check |
| --- | --- | --- |
| `profile_url` | Retain the public professional profile URL | URL is present and belongs to the permitted source list |
| `role` | Copy the observed professional role | Role is supported by the cited evidence or remains null |
| `organization` | Copy the observed organization name | Organization is supported and not inferred from a job listing |
| `observed_at` | Record when the evidence was observed | Timestamp is present and treated as an observation time |
| `evidence_url` | Link the source for the proposed row | Reviewer can inspect the source before use |
| `match_status` | Use `accepted`, `review`, or `unknown` | Ambiguous identity never becomes an accepted match automatically |

 

The sample uses `example.com` and `example.org` with fictional names and illustrative timestamps. It is a synthetic schema example, not a list of real people, measured output or source verification. One row is held for review because the evidence does not resolve identity; no private email, phone number or sensitive attribute is included.

 

## Try the sample locally

 

Download  [/use-cases/people-sourcing/sample.json](https://proxylane.dev/use-cases/people-sourcing/sample.json) , save it beside this script as `sample.json`, and run it with Python. It checks completeness, timestamps and the synthetic example hosts, then routes incomplete identity records to review.

 

```python
import json
from datetime import datetime
from pathlib import Path
from urllib.parse import urlparse

data = json.loads(Path("sample.json").read_text(encoding="utf8"))
assert data.get("sample_type") == "synthetic"
records = data.get("records", [])
assert records, "sample must contain records"

required = {"profile_url", "role", "organization", "observed_at", "evidence_url", "match_status"}
accepted = []
for record in records:
    issues = [f"missing {field}" for field in required if not record.get(field)]
    try:
        timestamp = datetime.fromisoformat(str(record.get("observed_at", "")).replace("Z", "+00:00"))
        if timestamp.tzinfo is None:
            issues.append("observed_at needs a timezone")
    except ValueError:
        issues.append("observed_at is not an ISO timestamp")
    for key in ("profile_url", "evidence_url"):
        parsed = urlparse(str(record.get(key, "")))
        if parsed.scheme != "https" or parsed.hostname not in {"example.com", "example.org"}:
            issues.append(f"{key} is outside the synthetic example hosts")
    if record.get("match_status") not in {"accepted", "review", "unknown"}:
        issues.append("match_status is invalid")
    if issues or record.get("match_status") != "accepted":
        print("identity review required:", record.get("profile_url", "(missing profile)"), issues)
    else:
        accepted.append(record)

print(f"{len(accepted)} record(s) eligible for recruiter review, {len(records) - len(accepted)} held back")
```

 

This validates the local synthetic schema only. It does not establish that a person exists, verify a source page, make a suitability judgment or call a ProxyLane API.

 

## Data requirements and economics

 

Before delivery, agree the role brief, target organization or geography, permitted public sources, required fields, refresh interval, expected volume, output format, identity review rules, permitted use, deletion and correction process. A concrete pilot output is an evidence file with accepted rows and a separate review queue for unresolved identities or missing fields. Recruiters decide whether and how to contact anyone.

 

The economic case can stay explicit without a fabricated benchmark: `pilot value = (accepted profiles reviewed × value of one reviewed profile) − pilot cost`. Supply your own value, review capacity and acceptance threshold; no response, placement or consent result is implied.

 

## Questions buyers usually ask

 

### Is this a job-listing search?

 

Job listings describe open roles. This proposed vertical records public professional evidence about possible people and preserves the evidence needed for human review.

 

### Will you infer a person’s private details or traits?

 

The proposed fields exclude private contact data and sensitive traits. Identity ambiguity remains in review, and permitted use must be scoped before a pilot.

 

### Can an accepted row be treated as a hiring recommendation?

 

`accepted` means the row met the agreed evidence checks for review. It does not mean suitability scoring, consent, employment status or a hiring decision.

 

### What happens if someone asks for correction or deletion?

 

Define the correction and deletion route, permitted sources and retention boundary in the pilot worksheet before delivery. Those rules are part of scope, not an unstated promise.

 

### What happens next?

 

Select **Request access** to open a reviewable email draft. Include the role brief, permitted source list, required fields, geography, refresh interval, output format, expected volume and acceptance rules.

 

## Request access

 

Tell us which sources and fields you need, and how often the data should refresh. We’ll confirm feasibility, scope, pricing and acceptance criteria with you.

  [Request access ↗](mailto:hello@proxylane.dev?subject=People%20sourcing%20access%20request&body=I%27d%20like%20to%20request%20access%20for%20People%20sourcing.%0A%0ASource%20URLs%20or%20domains%3A%0ARequired%20fields%3A%0AGeography%3A%0ARefresh%20interval%3A%0AOutput%20format%3A%0AExpected%20volume%3A%0AAcceptance%20rules%20and%20review%20budget%3A%0APermitted%20use%20and%20retention%3A%0A%0APlease%20confirm%20feasibility%2C%20scope%20and%20pricing%20before%20any%20work.)  

Opens an email draft to hello@proxylane.dev for you to review and send.

 

## Keep reading

[AI retrieval · Workflow guide

### Give your research agent source-linked records it can check

Scope source-linked retrieval records for research and RAG agents with explicit fields, review rules, and a synthetic local sample

 Read guide →](https://proxylane.dev/use-cases/ai-retrieval)   [Company enrichment · Workflow guide

### Turn supplied domains into reviewable CRM company records

Scope a company enrichment pilot that adds sourced fields, preserves ambiguity, and routes uncertain records for review

 Read guide →](https://proxylane.dev/use-cases/company-enrichment)   [E-commerce data · Workflow guide

### Compare competitor prices and stock with the fields your repricing review needs

Define a careful e-commerce monitoring pilot for competitor prices and stock, with variant matching, region-aware fields, acceptance rules and a synthetic local sample.

 Read guide →](https://proxylane.dev/use-cases/ecommerce)

Canonical source: https://proxylane.dev/use-cases/people-sourcing

Documentation index: https://proxylane.dev/llms.txt