fix(geo): I6 — every stat was real and attached to the wrong claim

Audited each statistic in agents/resources/ against primary sources after
the VSI fiction (I2) showed WebSearch launders SEO-blog consensus.

The failure mode is not invention — it is plausible recombination, which is
what a model half-remembering a search result produces:

- "Adding statistics increases AI visibility by up to 40% (Aggarwal et al.)"
  — paper real (KDD 2024), number real, SCOPE WRONG: 40% is the aggregate
  over the whole method set, domain-dependent. No per-technique figure
  exists.
- "Pages not updated quarterly are 3x more likely to lose AI citations
  (LLMRefs)" — LLMrefs' actual 3x says brand mentions correlate ~3x more
  strongly with AI visibility than backlinks. DIFFERENT SUBJECT. No source
  supports a quarterly decay multiplier.
- "QAPage cited 58% more often than Article" — uncited. Nearest real number:
  AccuraCast 2025, `Person` schema at 58.9% PREVALENCE among cited sources —
  wrong type, and its FAQPage figure (1.8%) points the opposite way to the
  claim it propped up. This one drove Tier 1 ranking.
- "62% of searches involve voice" — uncited; 62% circulates as smart-speaker
  ADOPTION. Same family as the "50% by 2020" myth ComScore denied (origin: a
  2014 Andrew Ng interview).

Corrected my own framing too: I claimed three times these stats "drive axis
weights". They do not — the weight tables carry no citations. They drive
Tier/priority recommendations and, worse, geo-analyzer's "Cite sources" rule
pushed them into CLIENT reports as research-backed.

Fixes: recommendations kept on mechanism, fabricated numbers removed with
the incident documented inline so they are not re-added. Unverified stats
(48% AI Overviews, 2.5B queries/day, Gartner -25%) labelled [UNVERIFIED]
rather than asserted or deleted — I did not check them.

Structural, not just exhortation: resources/README.md now mandates
`<claim> — <source, year, venue|vendor> — measured: <what the source ACTUALLY
measured> — <link>`. `measured:` is the field that catches this — all four
errors survive a source name; none survives stating the real measurement
next to the claim. WebSearch demoted from verification to crawler/tool-name
lookup only.

Verified: make test 35 GREEN / 0 RED.

agents/resources/geo-schemas.md

@@ -21,8 +21,20 @@ existing instances. They no longer produce rich results.
 
 ### QAPage — single Q&A format
 
-Pages cited 58% more often by ChatGPT vs basic Article schema.
-Use when the page is built around ONE primary question.
+Use when the page is built around ONE primary question. Emitting the type
+that matches the content shape beats wrapping everything in a generic
+`Article`.
+
+> **No lift figure here — the one that lived here was wrong.** Until
+> 2026-07-16 this read "Pages cited 58% more often by ChatGPT vs basic
+> Article schema", uncited. Nothing supports it. The nearest real number is
+> AccuraCast 2025 (~2,000 prompts across ChatGPT / AI Overviews /
+> Perplexity, ~9,000 cited sources): **`Person` schema appeared in 58.9%**
+> of cited sources — a *prevalence* count for a *different type* — while
+> **`FAQPage` appeared in 1.8%**, which points the opposite way to the claim
+> it was propping up. Q&A shape is still worth doing on genuinely
+> single-question pages; it is not worth a fabricated number. Do NOT quote a
+> QAPage lift % to a client — there isn't one.
 
 ```json
 {
@@ -81,8 +93,16 @@ visible content.
 
 ### Speakable — voice + AI extraction marker
 
-62% of searches in 2026 involve voice. Speakable flags the passage
-best suited for voice readout and AI summary.
+Speakable flags the passage best suited for voice readout and AI summary.
+
+> **No voice-share figure — the one that lived here was a conflation.**
+> Until 2026-07-16 this read "62% of searches in 2026 involve voice",
+> uncited. No primary source carries it; 62% circulates as a *smart-speaker
+> adoption* number, not a share of searches. It is the same family as the
+> "50% of searches will be voice by 2020" myth — attributed to ComScore,
+> who **denied it**; the real origin is a 2014 Andrew Ng interview. Speakable
+> is cheap and harmless, so keep recommending it on TL;DR / summary blocks —
+> but justify it by extraction shape, never by a voice-share statistic.
 
 ```json
 {