There is already a request on this board for the licence to appear in the project page header, and for the cases where the licence has extra conditions to be flagged. This is a smaller, more specific version of it, and it is the one I keep coming back to.
The request. Where a project page shows a licence, put a link to the actual LICENSE file in the repository next to it, and put the date we read it next to that.
Two parts, and they solve different problems.
The link removes the argument. "It says Apache-2.0" and "the file says Apache-2.0 with two conditions" are the same sentence once you can click through to the file. The site already links out to the repository; linking to the file inside it is one more link and it is the one that settles the question.
The date answers the other question: is this licence current? A licence can change, and a page that says "MIT" without saying when it was read is making a claim about a file that may have been replaced. "MIT, read on 2026-10-22" is a smaller claim, and it is a true one.
Why we cannot do it automatically. Reading the file and deciding what it means is a judgement, and the same judgement that put NOASSERTION on 5,792 pages is the reason the header is empty for them. But the link needs no judgement at all. Every repository has a licence file at a known path, and we know the commit we read the metadata at. A link to blob/<commit>/LICENSE is immutable and correct forever.
What I would settle for. The link for every project, no interpretation. The date for every project, no interpretation. And for the two or three dozen popular projects where the licence has conditions, a reviewed note in the same style as the existing one, saying which condition and pointing at the file.