The story contains several verifiable claims, such as the Met Gala attendance and the social media interactions between Walton Goggins and Aimee Lou Wood. However, the article lacks direct evidence for some claims, like the intentional avoidance at the Met Gala and the specific details of the alleged social media fallout. While the article accurately quotes Goggins' refusal to discuss his relationship with Wood in an interview, it does not provide direct evidence for the claim that Goggins blocked Wood on social media. The article relies on secondary reports for some details, which could affect the precision of the claims.

The article predominantly focuses on the alleged feud between Goggins and Wood, without offering much context or perspectives from the involved parties. It presents the narrative of a feud and reconciliation without including statements from Goggins or Wood that could provide a more balanced view. The story could benefit from presenting additional viewpoints or comments from representatives or other involved parties to avoid potential bias.

The article is generally clear and easy to follow, with a straightforward narrative about the alleged feud between Goggins and Wood. The language is accessible, and the structure logically presents the sequence of events. However, the lack of direct quotes or evidence for some claims may lead to confusion or skepticism among readers. Despite this, the article maintains a neutral tone and avoids overly sensational language, which aids in comprehension.

The article does not cite specific sources for many of its claims, such as the Met Gala interactions or the social media fallout. It relies on general observations from 'eagle-eyed Instagram users' and 'sleuths,' which lack credibility and authority. The absence of named sources or official statements weakens the reliability of the information presented. The article would benefit from referencing more authoritative sources or direct statements from the parties involved.

The article lacks transparency regarding its sources and the basis for its claims. It does not disclose how the information was obtained or provide context for the statements made about the alleged feud. The methodology behind the claims, such as the social media interactions and Met Gala avoidance, is not explained, making it difficult for readers to assess the validity of the information. Greater transparency in sourcing and methodology would improve the article's credibility.