trustmebro.to/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim

Chlorine is more electronegative than nitrogen

the verdict
COMMON KNOWLEDGE
Legacy classification; evidence review pending
Recorded sources
no sources on either side

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

Is it true that chlorine is more electronegative than nitrogen?

According to the Pauling electronegativity scale, nitrogen has an electronegativity of 3.04 while chlorine has an electronegativity of 3.16, making chlorine slightly more electronegative than nitrogen. This is a fundamental chemical fact that requires no citation.

Verdict: COMMON KNOWLEDGE · 0 sources for, 0 against · Last checked

The analysis

The claim compares the electronegativity of chlorine (3.16) and nitrogen (3.04) on the Pauling scale. This is a standard, universally accepted chemical fact taught in basic chemistry, qualifying it as common knowledge that does not require empirical papers to verify, despite the retrieval of unrelated chemistry papers in the search list.

What does the evidence say?

The claim compares the electronegativity of chlorine (3.16) and nitrogen (3.04) on the Pauling scale. This is a standard, universally accepted chemical fact taught in basic chemistry, qualifying it as common knowledge that does not require empirical papers to verify, despite the retrieval of unrelated chemistry papers in the search list.

Receipt History
first checked05 Aug 2026
judged → COMMON KNOWLEDGE · 9505 Aug 2026
Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work