How an article gets written

I save links to articles, papers, and posts as I read. Each one becomes a reading entry at /reading , with a short summary written by Claude at save time. Topics get tagged at the same time so entries cluster naturally.

When several reading entries share a topic (at least two, often more), the pipeline compiles a wiki article that synthesizes across them. The wiki article is one concept's view of what those sources collectively say.

Wiki articles cite the contributing sources inline. Every claim in the body should trace back to a /reading link. If it doesn't, that's a bug worth flagging.

Why two layers, not one

The reading entries preserve what each source actually said. The wiki articles do the cross-source synthesis. Keeping them separate means you can always check the original source against the synthesized claim. A single-layer system collapses both jobs into the same artifact and loses that property.

What "compiled by Claude" means

Each wiki article's frontmatter records which Claude model compiled it and when, in compiled_with and compiled_at. The choice of model affects quality and cost. The current default is Claude Sonnet for synthesis. I'll sometimes recompile articles with newer or different models when it's worth it.

Compiled does not mean fact-checked by Claude. It means the model wrote the synthesis given the sources I provided. The trust comes from the citations being checkable, not from the model being authoritative.

What to expect, what not to expect

First, expect the synthesis to reflect what the sources actually say, not external knowledge the model might have. The compiler sees the sources and is told to stay inside them.

Second, expect occasional drift. A claim sometimes lands slightly broader than the source supports. I run evals against citations to catch this; results are tracked publicly.

Third, don't expect this to replace reading the sources. The wiki is a navigation layer, not a substitute. If a topic matters to you, the reading entries link to the originals.

When articles change

Articles get recompiled when new sources land in the same topic. The compiled_at timestamp tells you the most recent compile. The git history at https://github.com/elliottsencan/elliottsencan.com/commits/main/src/content/wiki/<slug>.md tells you every prior version, including which sources were in scope at each compile.

How to flag something

If a claim looks wrong or a citation doesn't support what's claimed, the way to flag it is the email link in the footer. Send the article slug and the line in question. I'll fix it or recompile.