1. Capture the claim
Paste a URL, social post, headline, or free-form claim. The product treats the submission as a research prompt, not as a binary verdict request.
Methodology
How Citelink turns a claim into
an inspectable report.
The public product is built around traceability. The goal is not to hide the research path behind a score. The goal is to show the path well enough that readers can audit the output themselves.
2. Retrieve source coverage
The verification engine queries the indexed corpus across official documents, mainstream reporting, independent outlets, and research sources.
3. Compare what each source says
Matched material is compared for overlap, contradiction, timing, and source provenance so draft language and final language are not treated as the same thing.
4. Build the report
Citelink returns a grounded assessment with supporting, refuting, and related evidence instead of collapsing uncertainty into a single yes-or-no verdict.
5. Surface the missing context
The report shows source provenance, confidence, and notable omissions so readers can inspect what the coverage emphasized, missed, or distorted.
Questions readers ask
How does Citelink verify a claim?
A submitted URL, post, headline, or claim is treated as a research prompt, not a request for a binary verdict. Citelink retrieves coverage from official documents, mainstream reporting, independent outlets, and research sources, compares what each source says for overlap, contradiction, timing, and provenance, and returns a grounded assessment with supporting, refuting, and related evidence.
What does a weak-grounding or contested result mean?
The claim outruns the available record or conflicts with the strongest indexed sources. Citelink reports that uncertainty instead of collapsing it into a single yes-or-no verdict.
What does the report show besides a verdict?
The report shows source provenance, confidence, and notable omissions so readers can inspect what the coverage emphasized, missed, or distorted.
How are corrections handled?
When Citelink makes a mistake, it updates the article, timestamps the change, and records the revised verdict or explanation. Corrections can be requested by emailing hello@citelink.news.
Strong agreementhigh
The indexed record lines up across primary documents and secondary reporting with limited contradiction.
Mixed or incompletepartial
Parts of the claim hold up, but timing, scope, or omitted context changes the meaning.
Weak groundingcontested
The claim outruns the available record or conflicts with the strongest indexed sources.