Editorial standards protect clarity without forcing closure. They make uncertainty, disagreement, and methodological sensitivity visible — without collapsing them into scores.
Claims are grounded in inspectable sources (datasets, literature, authoritative syntheses).
Where evidence is weak or conflicting, that condition is explicitly signaled rather than smoothed away.
Tags describe governance state, uncertainty, sensitivity, and dispute — not quality, virtue, or reputational scores.
Some tags are contributor-open; others require steward confirmation due to systemic implications.
Public-facing maturity is earned through transparent criteria and review, not popularity.
Aggregation and summary outputs are guarded: additivity is not assumed across signals, geographies, or lenses without explicit policy.
