Verify a decision

{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-25T13:24:37.023Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"d0b4bbbf-b7e5-43f3-98d6-517bdcf70704","new_score":28,"page_slug":"axiom-trading","prev_score":38,"reason":"Of the 46 factual claims checked, 38 were confirmed and only 2 were disputed (claim_findings[6], claim_findings[7]), for a disputed rate of about 8.7% — numerically below the level that normally triggers a downgrade. But both disputed claims involve fabricated-looking biographical details about the company's named co-founders (a 'prior startup exit' claimed for each, and one founder's university), and in each case the page's own cited sources say something different, rather than simply being silent. The reviewer flagged this specifically as a high-priority gap (coverage_gaps[1]), describing the founder-background section as reading like it is authoritative and well-sourced when in fact it conflicts with the very citations attached to it. That is treated here as enough to warrant a revision requirement even though the overall dispute rate is low. The page's central reporting — the insider-trading allegations, the recorded call, and the Polymarket secondary scandal — remains thoroughly and independently corroborated with exact quote and figure matches across multiple outlets, so this is judged as a contained, fixable sourcing problem in a background section rather than a reason to doubt the page as a whole.","score_delta":-10,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}