Attribution Protocol
Separate pages and claims into: secure, workshop-assisted, disputed, and legacy reception. Never collapse these classes into a single undifferentiated narrative.
Home / Methodology
Research Rules
Methodology and Confidence
This page defines how pages are built and maintained. It keeps the site transparent by separating documented facts from interpretation and by making uncertainty visible rather than hidden.
Traceable claims
Explicit confidence
Revision-friendly
Core Rules
- Every major claim should be anchored to one or more clearly identified sources.
- Attribution-sensitive content must declare confidence and note major competing positions.
- Chronology pages should distinguish dated evidence from inferred sequencing.
- High-dispute topics should include a short "what is agreed vs disputed" section.
Confidence Labels
| Label | Definition | When to Use |
|---|---|---|
| High | Direct documentary support and broad scholarly alignment. | Baseline biography, contracts, secure dating anchors. |
| Medium | Strong but incomplete support, or limited disagreement. | Workshop roles, inferred relationships, version sequences. |
| Low | Contested or weakly documented claims. | Speculative identifications, disputed attributions, unresolved narratives. |
Chronology Protocol
Prefer dated records first, then technical and stylistic evidence, then contextual inference. Mark uncertain date ranges as ranges, not point dates.
Update Protocol
Preserve prior interpretations in changelog notes when major claim direction changes. Track why a revision happened and what source triggered it.