trace-a-claim-to-its-source

name	trace-a-claim-to-its-source
category	data
description	Reconstruct how a claim traveled through citations, summaries, and repetitions to its strongest available source. Use when a widely repeated statement may be distorted or circular.

trace-a-claim-to-its-source

Build a claim genealogy. Repetition can create the appearance of corroboration even when every path leads to one weak source.

When to use

• Use for viral statistics, unattributed quotations, policy claims, historical anecdotes, and repeated technical assertions.
• Preserve wording changes because each paraphrase can widen or narrow the original claim.

Procedure

1. Record the exact current claim, where it appeared, date, author, and surrounding argument.
2. Extract every citation, link, named authority, distinctive phrase, and numerical fingerprint.
3. Follow each reference backward and log the source-to-source relationship.
4. Search exact phrases, variants, dates, names, archives, books, databases, and identifiers.
5. Compare wording at each hop for changed scope, certainty, population, time, or causality.
6. Identify branches that converge on a shared upstream source and do not count them as independent corroboration.
7. Inspect the earliest accessible evidence in context and determine whether it originated, measured, witnessed, or merely repeated the claim.
8. Classify the trace as supported, transformed but partly supported, circular, misattributed, contradicted, or unresolved.
9. Produce a dated trace table and recommend corrected attribution or wording.

Failure plan

• Do not assume the earliest indexed page is the origin.
• If a paywall, deleted page, private archive, or missing edition breaks the chain, preserve the gap.
• Do not identify a person as the origin without publication or archival evidence.
• Keep independent branches separate until common provenance is proven.

Done

• The claim’s citation chain and wording changes are documented
• Shared upstream sources and apparent circular corroboration are visible
• The conclusion and recommended wording do not outrun the accessible evidence