NarrowHighway
The record · A correction

The engine corrected its own record

On July 7, 2026, we audited our own connection data and found that every automatically-detected “cites” link — 2,050 of them — overclaimed. This page is the honest account of what was wrong, what we did, and how you can re-check all of it. We are telling you because an engine that cannot say we were wrong cannot be trusted when it says this holds.

What was wrong

Our library links records to the Scripture they engage. An earlier pass created those links by matching book names: if an entry's text contained the word “Matthew,” the engine recorded “cites Matthew.” The audit found that not one of those 2,050 links pointed at an actual passage — no chapter, no verse. An entry that merely named a book was being credited with citing it. “Herodias cites John” read as if Herodias quoted the gospel; the entry only mentioned the name.

What we did — three movements

1 · The demotion. All 2,050 links were relabeled from cites to references — the truthful verb. Nothing was deleted: every link, and the correction itself, stays in the record. See one: “Easton: Chaldee language references Matthew” →
2 · The restoration. A citation now has to be earned. Only where a record's own text carries a literal chapter-and-verse reference — “Acts 19:22” — does the engine restore cites, and the edge records the exact reference as its evidence. 2,841 genuine citations were re-earned this way. See one: “Easton: Erastus cites Acts” — evidence: Acts 19:22 →
3 · The weaving. With citations honest, we added what the mention links truly are: 8,873 name cross-references — a record that speaks of David links to the entry on David — using the dictionary's own person/place classification, never a guess. Disconnected records fell from 43% of the library to under 8%.

The numbers

MeasureCount
Overclaimed “cites” links found & demoted2,050
Genuine citations re-earned (chapter:verse evidence)2,841
Name cross-references added (curated person/place)8,873
Records with no connections — before → after43.1% → 7.9%
Links deleted or hidden0

Every change was mechanical, re-runnable, and reversible; the tools that made them are in the open source. No link exists that cannot show its evidence.

Why this matters beyond us

Most systems that discover an embarrassment in their data quietly fix it — or quietly keep it. A record you can trust is one that keeps the correction in the record. The same discipline governs the verification engine itself: it holds a public benchmark of 0 false positives across sixty domains, because the one unforgivable act for a verifier is sealing a falsehood — including its own.

Explore the corrected web on the map, or put the engine to work from your own tools — connect your agent.