About CiteMaybe.

Who maintains the audit?

CiteMaybe is a tool for website owners and marketing teams deciding what to fix on a public page. CiteMaybe’s maintainers publish the English-language site, maintain the scanner and its rule definitions, and write the field guide and case study under the CiteMaybe byline.

The case study covers our own website. You can inspect the public source excerpts and rule outcomes without an account or a private report link. Read the self-audit.

How to check a claim

For a measured result, find the observation.

A check should identify its page, rule version, time, and evidence. The public evidence file includes final URLs, page hashes, and selected findings from both case-study runs. Compare the same rule and URL across the runs. The hash identifies the fetched document at that time.

For an interpretation, read the passage.

A matching passage or possible content gap is a heuristic finding. Read the quote in context and ask the site owner to confirm any product, pricing, or service facts before editing. The sample report uses fictional pages to demonstrate the interface.

For a platform claim, follow the source.

The methodology links directly to provider documentation for crawler purposes. An actual API search observation should show the question, time, model, answer, and linked citation. An empty observation means the question remains unmeasured.

Send an evidence correction

Select the public page and identify the sentence or finding that needs review. If a versioned rule is involved, include its ID, version, and observation date. A short excerpt or public source URL helps the maintainers reproduce the discrepancy.

Keep private report links, credentials, and personal information out of the submission. After your correction is saved, the confirmation page shows a receipt number. How correction records are handled.