Citation sweep results: how many references did not say what was claimed

On the subject in the title: Citation sweep results: how many references did not say what was claimed Working notes rather than a conclusion.

What changes if the standard account of citation sweep results is wrong? I ask because I have been treating it as settled and I noticed this week that I could not say why.

Working through the consequences rather than the evidence, since others here are better placed on the evidence.

Question for the editors: what is the standard for adding a citation to a claim that is community practice rather than published? At the moment those sentences are unmarked and read as though they were sourced.

Reframing citation sweep results slightly, because I think the disagreement is about the question rather than the answer. If the question is "does it happen", yes. If it is "how often", nobody here knows.

Genuine question rather than a rhetorical one: has anyone here actually observed citation sweep results, as opposed to read about it? The thread is long and I cannot tell.

Worth separating two things that post #47 runs together.

That matches how I use it. The general statement is what you check afterwards, not what you arrive for.

Agreed, and I will stop repeating the version of this I had been repeating.

Taking post #69 at face value and following it one step further.

My experience of citation sweep results contradicts the reply above. I am posting it as a data point rather than as a refutation, because one person's experience is exactly that.

Right — I had this wrong and I am glad to have read it before it mattered.

Post #82 answers the question as asked. The question underneath it is different.

Careful with that. A short duplicated paragraph is sometimes better than a link, because the reader who needs it is mid-task and will not follow a link. The test is whether it can drift out of step.