A citation you do not open is a costume of a lie
A missing citation is a hole. A fake citation is a trap for a teacher and for you: it looks honest, but the book is not there, the article is not there, the page is not there. A model can stack authors, years, publishers. An ISBN that does not exist. 学校 work with such an item is a cheat on the reader, even if you “only copied”. A detective opens every citation from chat before writing it into a list. It does not open: it must not be there. It opens, but the fact is not there: it must not be there for that fact. It opens and sits: only now may you. 準備 said who and where. Today you say: where, which I really saw. Seeing is a condition. Hearing from a model is not seeing.
Ema gets “Novák, Histories of Rivers, 1998, p. 45”. Adam looks in a catalogue. Nothing. Ema: “But there was an ISBN.” The ISBN was stacked. A teacher might google it and get angrier than at a missing source. They cross out the whole item. They leave a textbook they hold. Ema goes red that she almost handed it in “for an impression of learning”. Adam: “Learning is when you can say you do not have a source.” A fake citation is the opposite of learning. It is theatre. Theatre in a report falls. Teachers read this field. Some even check. Even if they do not, you know.
A library catalogue or an imprint in your hand. Not an AI overview in a search engine that cites a model again.
Seeing, not hearing. Theatre vs. a source
A source is a thing you can show. Theatre is a sentence that looks like a source. A detective hates theatre, not a model. A model stacks theatre because a citation sounds like a continuation of learned text. You do not let theatre into the list. Technique: each item from chat onto a slip. Open. The slip into the bin or into the notebook. No “we will add later” with a fake — later you forget and hand it in. Better a list of two true ones than of five, of which three are costumes. A mark for honesty is dearer than for the length of a list.
An item test. All must be yes.
- Can I open it today? (a book, a school PDF, a website)
- Is the author / title I list there?
- Is the fact I lean on there?
- Is it not a chatbot in disguise again?
When 1 is no → the item dies. When 1 yes, 3 no → it dies for that fact. An example of death: “Havel 1994” with no book. An example of life: “Geography 6, p. 41” on the desk.
Do not add a fake “so the list looks”. A teacher notices impression. Citation software notices nonsense too. You do too.
Why this right now
You are in the course Ask with Martin, level Detective. You work in a chatbot (ChatGPT, Gemini or Claude) — same game, different brand. No code. A parent or the school creates the account. A child’s email does not belong here.
This is not the インベンター level. There you build a chatbot on your own website. Here you are a user: a question, a check, a citation.
You will know this lesson by one sentence: A citation counts only when you see the source. Hearing it from AI is not enough. When you can say it to a parent or a teacher, you have got the core. The rest is practice, not magic.
Tomorrow a picture from AI as “proof”. The same logic: see how it was made, do not trust a costume. Today text theatre. Tomorrow picture theatre.
Four things you will build in this course
The course has four small projects. You do not have to do them all at once. Today you add only what this lesson can do.
🏫 A report with citations
An outline, three sources that exist, and a sentence in your own words. AI must not be the only author.
The three-sources project: each must pass the seeing test.
📝 Test training
Coach role: let it ask, do not let it say the answer. You count / answer yourself.
A coach does not need citations. When it dumps them, you cross them out.
📅 Family planner
Tasks for the week (not passwords, not marks). A parent sees the plan, not your chat.
A planner does not cite books by force.
📜 An AI code for the class
Seven short rules on a poster. No horror — a how-to.
Code: “No theatre in a bibliography.”
Workshop: slips into the bin
You ask for three citations on a topic. Each onto a slip. You open. Bin or notebook. Goal: the bin must not be empty only because you did not open.
-
M1: “suggest three sources about … that a Year 6/7 pupil could open. No invented books. If you do not know, I DO NOT KNOW.”
-
Each draft onto a slip. Open a catalogue / a book / a website with a parent.
-
It does not open → bin. It opens and the fact is not there → bin for that fact.
-
A living source: into the notebook in the exact write-up school wants. You see it.
-
If all three die, a textbook remains. That is a win, not a loss.
Practice: a hole, or theatre
A missing source vs. a fake. Which is worse and why? What do you do?
-
Work with no list, but sentences from a textbook you have.
-
A list with Novák 1998, the book is not there.
-
ChatGPT as a bibliography item.
Now you 💪
Go through three checks. At each one tick in your head: can I see it, or not?
- You know the four-question test for a citation.
- A fake goes into the bin, not into impression.
- A textbook in your hand is a valid source.
If something is missing, go back to the steps above. This is not a test for marks. It is a safety net, so you go on sure, not confused.
Check: At least one fake went into the bin and you really saw at least one source.
What to take from this lesson
- A fake citation is a lie about a source.
- Seeing > hearing from a model.
- A shorter true list > long theatre.
- An ISBN and a year can be stacked.
- We will add later with a fake = we hand in a lie.
- The names in the examples (Ema, Adam) are made up. Do not put your number, email or photo here.
- Next lesson: When you can do this, go to the next lesson in the same level.
© 2026 Ing. Martin Polak / AlgoRhino · コンテンツ利用規約