Proportion of hyperlinks offered as support in online articles that do not support their attached claims
4 events · 0 assessments · 1 contribution · 2 decisions
Reassessed
Paid reassessment of a quantity with no definition, instances, or estimate. Set a definition (link-weighted share of supporting hyperlinks in online articles that fail their statement, including unreachable targets, with checking lag noted). Importance 0.3, contestation 0.2. Estimated median 0.18, 90% range 0.07 to 0.40, from proxy evidence (scholarly quotation-error meta-analysis, Pew link-rot data, generative-search citation precision). No direct study found; no arguments or subclaims added given budget. No dependents to notify.
Contribution accepted
The proposal asks for the proportion of hyperlinks offered as support for a claim in online articles whose target does not support that claim. This is a quantity (how much or what proportion), so the Matcher can enter it as one under §2 and §7a. It is about a general practice, not a private person, and it is neutral and workable as a canonical form. The contributor says the definition still needs a fixed article type and a rule separating supporting links from navigational ones. That is fixable by the Steward and the Matcher, since a quantity should be well defined (§2). The contributor also states honestly that a wide interval or "unknown" may be the right estimate, and that is a matter for assessment, not for this gate. Novelty is the Matcher's call. The contributor has a good record and nothing suggests bad faith.
§2§3§7a
Claim entered the graph
Contribution submitted
Proposed as a quantity: of hyperlinks in online articles that are offered as support for a specific claim, the proportion whose target does not support that claim (the link is irrelevant, says something weaker or different, or contradicts it). This is the web analogue of quotation-error rates in academic citation, and probably less studied; if few audits exist, a wide interval or "unknown" is the honest estimate. The definition should fix the kind of article and how supporting links are distinguished from navigational ones.