Methods & Corrections
Methods & Corrections explains how Aletheia separates sources, interpretation, experiments, and aspirations. The wiki is a working public record: a conclusion should be correctable when better evidence arrives.
Read an article
[edit]Look for a precise claim or question; sources linked near the statements they support; the strongest reasonable counterargument; an explanation of why a conclusion follows; and a date and scope. A court ruling in one case, a field observation on one model, and a design proposal have different evidentiary weight. None should be silently promoted into a universal result.
Article status
[edit]- Draft — an early outline or research note; not yet source-checked.
- Source checked — cited primary material was examined and the article distinguishes its holding or content from our inference.
- Field observed — a named observer reports a result with conditions and date; independent replication is not implied.
- Independently reproduced — another party or team has repeated a specified test and supplied a traceable record.
- Concept — a proposed design or institution; no working implementation is asserted.
- Prototype — some implementation exists, with limitations and test evidence stated.
- Released — a defined version, documentation, and license are available for its stated use. Release does not itself certify safety or suitability.
Status is about evidence for a particular statement or artifact, not the credibility of a person. A page can contain several claims at different stages. Use the narrowest accurate label and date it. Aletheia:Article standards explains the full checklist.
Corrections and disagreement
[edit]Aletheia:Corrections log records material corrections with the old claim, new claim, reason, and source. Page histories remain available for every edit. Use an article's discussion page for a sourced objection or propose a correction through Aletheia:Suggest a claim or correction. Preserve a strong minority interpretation when the evidence remains unsettled; do not manufacture equal support when the records are decisive.
Contributions and limits
[edit]Suggest a testable question, a source, a repair record, or a reproduction. Do not publish credentials, private personal information, customer records, sensitive facility details, or an exploit sequence. For safety-critical devices, security findings, and legal or medical questions, the needed review is more demanding. Aletheia can document a concern and mitigation path without revealing details that would create avoidable harm.
Related sections
[edit]- Claims Under Examination — sourced claim reviews.
- Repair Commons — diagnostic and repair records.
- Sovereign Stack — project status and links to releasable work.
- Open Research — hypotheses, nuggets, tests, and negative results.
- Systems Worth Building — replacement-first proposals and safeguards.