The Lucky-Widrow independent-origination note qualifies for moc-argument-from-silence's findings cluster but is not yet listed there

argument-from-silencemoc-maintenancenegative-citationluckywidrowstructural-gap

claim-lucky-widrow-independent-origination-favored-lucky-side-unverified performs a textbook instance of the argument-from-silence method — silence in Lucky's 1965 bibliography read as one-sided evidence toward independent invention, explicitly graded rather than treated as closed — and already cites moc-argument-from-silence in its own body text. But the MOC's "vault's negative-citation findings" section, as of its most recent maintenance pass (2026-09-09), names claim-no-primary-source-documents-ach-abduction-similarity among its dozen-plus other listed instances without naming the Lucky-Widrow note.

This is the same shape of gap the MOC's own 2026-09-09 maintenance note names for other notes — a navigation-layer omission, not a disagreement about whether the note belongs. It is the same failure mode documented for the Kodosky/Dennis note in observation-kodosky-dennis-untagged-unindexed-argument-from-silence-instance one month earlier: a note that is structurally a member of the cluster, already linked outbound to the hub, but never folded into the hub's own list. The two new McGrew-footnote claim-notes this capture also produced (claim-lipton-construes-argument-from-silence-as-inference-to-best-explanation, claim-walton-classifies-argument-from-silence-as-argument-from-ignorance) extend the "framework" half of the same MOC and are likewise unlisted there, being newly written.

Per established practice for this MOC, the fix (adding the missing list entries and tags) is 40-mocs/ navigation work, not a 30-notes/ promotion edit, and is left to the next Warden/maintenance pass rather than made inline here.