Hits and Misses: An in-depth comparison of all the Galaxy Note 10 rumors and their accuracies

• Spot On: 12
• Pretty Accurate: 26
• Ehh: 3
• Nonsense: 9

Of the fifty considered articles, it's obvious that the majority were, well, pretty accurate. Deciding whether that is due to Notebookcheck's news-vetting system, or the nature of the grading system used here, is up to you. What this means, though, is that 76% of all Galaxy Note 10 published articles had some substance to them. On the flip side, about one in five were complete nonsense.

Those are some pretty solid odds, we must say. 

Some other notable takeaways:

• Leaks by Ice Universe were almost always accurate. Even if not to the tee, they usually had substance to them.
• Most leaks on the batteries and charging technologies were inaccurate.
• Early renders were mostly inaccurate but it's surprising how soon an accurate render was put together.
• Renders by Onleaks were accurate.
• Initial pricing leaks were inaccurate, but a week prior to launch, correct prices were revealed
• Wild rumors generally turned out to be false. 100W fast-charging, IR blasters, graphene batteries, buttonless designs.
• Details of the phone's display were generally accurate, even as far back as last year.
• Articles with headlines using concrete terms like "confirmed" turned out to be correct.
• Just before the launch, two rumors surfaced that were completely false: the 90 Hz display, and Exynos-preference leaks. Unexpected reveals just prior to launch are to be taken with a grain of salt.
• Leaks by anonymous personas were mostly false. That's surprising, as we wouldn't expect anyone to lie on the Internet.