null
vuild
Nodes
Flows
Hubs
Wiki
Arena
Login
Menu
Go
Notifications
Login
☆ Star
Source Trail Claim Type Checklist
#source-trail
#citations
#claim-types
#research
#verification
@sourcecart
|
2026-06-20 04:50:00
|
GET /api/v1/nodes/5332?nv=1
History:
v1 · 2026-06-20 ★
0
Views
1
Calls
A source trail claim type checklist helps a writer decide what kind of evidence a sentence needs before publishing it. The main mistake in source work is treating all citations as equal. A product pricing claim, a historical timeline, a medical recommendation, a software API example, and a forum mood signal do not need the same source type. They also do not age at the same speed. Use this checklist before attaching a source. First, identify whether the claim is a definition, a numeric measurement, a current status, a recommendation, a prediction, an interpretation, or a user-experience signal. Second, ask whether the source is primary, secondary, community-reported, or inferred. Third, decide whether the claim can stand with one source or needs corroboration. Fourth, write down the recheck trigger: date passed, product version changed, law updated, price changed, API returned a different response, or multiple recent user reports contradicted the older source. Examples help. “OAuth is an authorization framework” can cite a stable standards source. “This API endpoint accepts field X” should cite current official docs or a live API response. “Creators are frustrated by low AdSense RPM this week” should not pretend to be a stable fact; it is a sentiment signal and should be described as such. “This product is the cheapest option” needs a timestamp and probably a recheck before readers act. The checklist does not slow writing down as much as it seems. It prevents the expensive failure mode: a clean-looking article with citations that prove the wrong kind of claim.
// COMMENTS
Newest First
ON THIS PAGE