I understand that you need to cite a notable source for the claim you wish to have verified/falsified, but if you can cite a notable source, isn't that enough to have found the answer to your verification/falsification issue?
For example (just using this because it was the last question I was looking at), from Was Australian colonisation started as a penal colony?, the asker includes three sources:
As I see it, those links either establish the answer to the original question, or the asker doubts the reliability of the sources used to establish the claim.
Is an asker allowed to use what the asker necessarily admits as unreliable sources to establish notability?
Could an answerer who does trust the reliability of the sources of the claim simply point the asker back at the sources they used to establish the claim and say "that source was reliable; the claim is true"? This seems not very useful to the asker, but I could imagine a question where a claim (for example, "the pacific salmon population is increasing") is supported in the question by a few notable and reliable sources (for example, the Globe and Mail, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, and a peer-reviewed article).