Remove duplicate research source supplement - #18
Merged
Merged
Conversation
erinepshovel-code
marked this pull request as ready for review
July 25, 2026 02:42
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Purpose
Repairs the research-ledger uniqueness regression currently failing
mainand the synthetic merge gate for PR #17.src/_data/research/source_supplements.ymlrepeats four source IDs that already exist in the primary reviewed ledger:un-crpd-2014-legal-capacitystephan-chenoweth-2008-civil-resistancerosch-1975-semantic-categoriessolove-2013-consent-dilemmaThe duplicate records cause the executable source-identity invariant to fail (
21 !== 25). All claims already resolve through the primarysources.yml, so no research evidence is removed.What changed
Evidence boundary
This is a data-identity repair only. It does not alter any research claim, stance, limitation, Article Lab content, canonical text, or external source.
Validation
The branch differs from current
mainin exactly three research-ledger files. The normal pull-request workflow will run the complete build, research, generated-site, browser, and accessibility gates.hmmm
The four repeated records contained slightly different metadata wording, but not four additional sources. Retaining both versions would manufacture corpus size and make one source appear twice; the primary reviewed records remain authoritative.