The moment a registry begins assessing rather than recording, it becomes something that cannot be checked — because an assessment cannot be shown to be wrong the way a fact can.
That single distinction shapes every other decision.
Record facts, not judgements
- A publication exists or it does not; whether it is good is not a registry question.
- Record formal outcomes — retractions, corrections — with their sources.
- Never record suspicion, allegation or open concern.
- Facts can be corrected; judgements cannot be disproved.
Show where everything came from
- Source and date on every field.
- Confirmed, self-reported and inferred distinguished explicitly.
- Provenance carried through exports.
- Data without provenance cannot be evaluated by anyone, including us.
Be correctable
- A visible route on every record.
- A stated response time.
- Corrections logged, previous values retained.
- Being wrong is inevitable; being uncorrectable is a choice.
Preserve history
- Never overwrite an affiliation, a name or an institutional structure.
- Retired identifiers remain resolvable.
- Superseded entities are retained and linked.
- History discarded cannot be recovered, and someone will need it.
State what is not covered
- Coverage published by field.
- Known limitations stated plainly, not in an appendix.
- A sparse record described as poor coverage, not low activity.
- Never present a record as complete.
Respect the people in the record
- Professional facts only — the aggregation is assessed, not the individual fields.
- Scholars can see, correct and restrict their record.
- Requests citing personal safety handled confidentially and quickly.
- The people described did not choose to be aggregated.
One thing worth remembering
A registry that records only facts can be shown to be wrong and then fixed.
One that records judgements cannot — which means its errors are permanent, invisible, and borne entirely by the people described in it.
Câu hỏi thường gặp
Why record facts rather than judgements?
Because facts can be corrected while judgements cannot be disproved — and a registry that assesses rather than records becomes something that cannot be checked.
What does provenance require?
Source and date on every field, confirmed and self-reported and inferred distinguished explicitly, and provenance carried through exports.
Why preserve history?
Because history discarded cannot be recovered and someone will need it — affiliations, names and institutional structures should never be overwritten.
How should coverage be handled?
Published by field with known limitations stated plainly, describing a sparse record as poor coverage rather than low activity, and never presenting a record as complete.
What follows from recording only facts?
That the registry can be shown to be wrong and then fixed — whereas one recording judgements has errors that are permanent and borne by the people described.
