Rejecting a quotation from publication and erasing it from the record are two different decisions. This page is the record.
What this page is
This article's evidence came from papers in the source library, most of them open access, so its quotations verified straightforwardly. One was recorded as unverifiable during drafting. On re-checking during verification it turned out to be genuine, and the article now prints it. The entry is kept, with the reversal, because how a false negative was produced is worth more to a reader than a clean page.
Status words.
- REFUTED — the attribution or wording is demonstrably wrong. A better copy will not help.
- UNVERIFIABLE — no route to the named source has been found yet. That is a statement about this project's reach, not about the claim.
- PRINTED WITH A FLAG — the wording is genuine and correctly attributed, but the fact it asserts could not be checked, so the article prints it as somebody's claim and says the number is unverified.
Nothing on this page was established with WebFetch. Every check below was made against downloaded bytes.
1. "The most telomeric ever identified"
Wording as it circulates: "we defined a novel gene family – the most telomeric ever identified – named DDX11L."
Claimed source: Valerio Costa and colleagues, "DDX11L: a novel transcript family emerging from human subtelomeric regions," BMC Genomics 10:250, 2009. The wording appears in this project's own research notes on chromosome 2, attributed to that paper.
Status: VERIFIED. The earlier verdict of UNVERIFIABLE was wrong, and the article now prints the sentence.
What the drafting check recorded. The full text was fetched as XML from Europe PMC (PMC2705379) and stored in the source library. The note written at the time says it was searched for "most telomeric" and for "telomeric ever" and that neither phrase occurs anywhere in the paper as served.
What the verification check found. The phrase is in the paper. It sits in the Results, under the heading "Genomic structure and localization of DDX11L genes", and reads in full: "In this way, we defined a novel gene family – the most telomeric ever identified – named DDX11L." A plain grep -i "most telomeric" on the stored .xml and on its .md extraction returns it. So the earlier search either ran against a truncated copy, ran only over the abstract, or was written with the straight hyphens and quotation marks that the original does not use, which is the commonest way a real phrase is written off as absent.
Why it is kept on this page. The rule this project works to is that "I could not find it" is not "it does not exist." This is a worked example of that rule failing in the direction that loses good evidence, and the sentence is a strong one: the authors themselves call DDX11L the most telomeric gene family ever identified, and one of its members sits at the fusion site, interstitially. Deleting the entry would hide how the mistake happened.
What the article does now. Part 3 quotes the sentence directly from the Results, beside the abstract's list of loci. A second locator was added to the Costa footnote and it records the reversal.