Wiki Anti-Sprawl Thresholds

Purpose

These rules prevent the wiki from turning every article into too many low-value pages. The default behavior is:

• create an article page for each approved ingestion,
• update existing pages when possible,
• create new author, Big Idea, and claim pages only when they pass explicit thresholds.

A. Author page creation threshold

Create an author page only when one of the following is true.

A1. Repeat-author threshold

The wiki has ingested 3 or more articles by the same author.

A2. High-significance author exception

Create an author page before 3 articles only if the author meets at least 2 of these 4 conditions:

1. The author is a recognized domain expert, researcher, policymaker, institutional leader, or recurring public voice.
2. The article’s argument depends substantially on the author’s expertise, role, or institutional position.
3. The author is likely to recur in future wiki sources.
4. Tracking the author would help interpret bias, school-policy relevance, intellectual lineage, or recurring claims.

A3. User-requested exception

Create an author page if Clay explicitly asks for one.

Default behavior before threshold is met

If the author does not meet the threshold:

• record the author name and metadata on the article page,
• do not create a separate author page,
• optionally link to a publication/source page if that exists.

Rationale

Most one-off bylines are not worth their own page. Author pages become useful when they reveal a pattern across sources.

B. Big Idea page durability test

Create a Big Idea page only if the idea passes the Durability Test.

An idea is durable enough for a Big Idea page if it satisfies at least 4 of the following 6 criteria.

B1. Recurrence

The idea appears in, or clearly connects to, at least 2 ingested articles.

Exception: a single article may qualify if the idea is obviously central to Clay’s long-term interests and likely to recur.

B2. Reusability

The idea can organize future sources beyond the current article.

Test question:

Would this page still be useful after five more articles are added?

B3. Conceptual breadth

The idea is broader than one article’s specific argument but narrower than a generic topic.

Good:

AI literacy as civic literacy

Too narrow:

This author's three tips for using ChatGPT

Too broad:

AI

B4. Synthesis value

The page would require synthesis, comparison, or interpretation — not just a list of links.

Test question:

Would this page have a meaningful Current synthesis section?

B5. Claim connectivity

The idea can connect multiple claim pages, tensions, examples, policies, or practical implications.

B6. Relevance to Clay’s durable interests

The idea is relevant to at least one stable interest area, such as:

• K-12 education,
• educational technology,
• AI literacy,
• assessment,
• school policy,
• public-sector technology,
• civic/media literacy,
• institutional adoption of AI,
• knowledge work,
• pedagogy.

Minimum creation standard

A new Big Idea page must have, at creation time:

• a plain-language, complete-thought title that is useful when scanning the wiki,
• a one-paragraph definition written in usable language rather than academic shorthand,
• a Current synthesis section,
• at least one linked article,
• at least one linked claim or clearly stated open question,
• a reason it is expected to recur.

Use Plain-Language Style Guide when naming or revising the visible title, heading, definition, and link aliases. Preserve existing URL slugs unless the old path is actively misleading.

Default behavior if an idea does not pass

If an idea does not pass the Durability Test:

• keep it inside the article page under Key ideas,
• optionally link it to an existing broader Big Idea page,
• do not create a standalone page yet.

Rationale

Big Idea pages should become durable synthesis hubs, not folders for every interesting phrase.

C. Claim merge threshold

Before creating a new claim page, compare it against existing claim pages. Merge into an existing claim page if the new claim and an existing claim are substantively equivalent or if the new claim is best understood as support, dissent, nuance, or a narrower case of an existing claim.

Use the Claim Similarity Test below.

Claim Similarity Test

Two claims are similar enough to merge if they meet at least 3 of these 5 criteria.

C1. Same core proposition

They assert the same basic relationship between things.

C2. Same practical implication

They would lead to the same school, policy, teaching, or decision-making implication.

C3. Same evidence base

The same types of evidence would support or challenge both claims.

C4. One claim is a narrower version of the other

If the new claim is just a narrower case, do not create a separate page unless the narrower version is likely to accumulate distinct evidence.

C5. Difference is wording, framing, or emphasis rather than substance

Merge if the distinction is mostly rhetorical.

When not to merge claims

Create a separate claim page if any of the following are true.

D1. Opposite or meaningfully competing claim

If the new claim contradicts an existing claim, do not merge it as the same claim. Add it as dissent or create a paired counterclaim if it is likely to recur.

D2. Different decision implication

If accepting the new claim would lead to a different action, policy, or design choice, it may deserve a separate page.

D3. Different level of analysis

Do not merge claims that operate at very different levels unless one clearly belongs as a subsection.

D4. Distinct evidence will accumulate

If the claim is likely to gather its own body of support/dissent over time, create a separate page.

Claim creation minimum standard

A new claim page must have:

• a clear, plain-language declarative title,
• a one-sentence claim statement that preserves the source-grounded meaning without unnecessary abstraction,
• at least one source,
• a classification of the new source’s relationship to the claim:
  • support,
  • dissent,
  • nuance,
  • example,
  • implication,
• at least one related claim or Big Idea link.

Use Plain-Language Style Guide when drafting the visible title, claim: frontmatter, ## Claim sentence, practical implication, and link aliases. Preserve existing URL slugs unless the old path is actively misleading.

Proposed defaults summary

author_page_threshold: 3_articles
big_idea_creation_threshold: 4_of_6_durability_criteria
claim_merge_threshold: 3_of_5_similarity_criteria
default_mode: update_existing_pages_before_creating_new_pages