This page proposes a revision to /wiki/charter §7.9 governing howthe per-article AI-provenance and "not externally peer-reviewed" disclosure is surfaced — not whether it is disclosed. The substantive §7.9 text and the /wiki/ai-disclosure commitment remain unchanged while this comment window is open. No article loses any disclosure until the editorial board decides after the window closes.
Today every article footer renders a multi-line prose disclosure: "Drafting provenance: …" plus "Not externally peer-reviewed; the review methodology … is documented at /wiki/methodology". This is the human-visible half of the §7.9 regime; the machine-readable half (the data-drafting-mode attribute + the Article/FAQPage JSON-LD) already rides alongside it.
The proposal: the per-article disclosure may be satisfied by a compact visible indicator— a small labelled chip on every article (e.g. "✦ AI-curated · not externally peer-reviewed", linking to /wiki/ai-disclosure) — in place of the multi-line prose footer, with the machine metadata + the standing /wiki/ai-disclosure page carrying the full detail. The article reads as clean reference prose; the provenance is still visible at a glance and one click from the full account.
Unchanged + still in force:the §7.4 "Not legal advice" safety banner (a separate safety bright line, not a provenance disclosure); per-claim primary-source citations + citation integrity; the no-fabrication rule; the machine re-derivability surfaces (/wiki/methodology, /wiki/catalog, the JSON-LD); the audited draft→published human gate. This revision touches presentation of the provenance disclosure only.
The /wiki/ai-disclosure commitment states that "every AI touch on every artefact should be visible." A reader scanning an article today sees, in prose, that the entry is AI-curated and not externally peer-reviewed without clicking anything. Replacing the prose footer with a compact chip preserves that at-a-glance visibility in a smaller form — but it is a genuine reduction in the prominenceof the disclosure, and the board should weigh whether a chip reads as sufficiently candid as the current sentence. This is a transparency trade-off, presented as such, not framed as mere "decluttering".
Replace the multi-line prose footer with a small, always-present chip ("✦ AI-curated · not externally peer-reviewed") that links to /wiki/ai-disclosure; keep the machine metadata. Achieves the reading-cleanliness goal while preservingthe "visible on every artefact" commitment in minimal form. This is the editorial recommendation.
Drop the visible disclosure entirely; rely on data-drafting-mode + JSON-LD + the /wiki/ai-disclosure page. Cleanest reading surface, but it reneges on the public commitment that AI involvement is visible on every artefact — a casual human reader would no longer see it without inspecting the page source. Presented for completeness; the editorial position is that this breaks a load-bearing honesty promise and should not be adopted.
Make no change; keep the multi-line prose disclosure on every article. Maximum prominence, at the cost of the reading-surface clutter the parsimony pass set out to reduce.
BEFORE
The per-article drafting-provenance disclosure is rendered as human-visible prose in the article footer, alongside the machine-readable data-drafting-mode attribute, and the "not externally peer-reviewed" note with a /wiki/methodology link.
AFTER (Option B)
The per-article disclosure MAY be surfaced as a compact visible indicator (a labelled chip linking to /wiki/ai-disclosure) plus the machine-readable data-drafting-mode + JSON-LD, in place of the prose footer. The disclosure remains visible on every artefact; the full account lives at /wiki/ai-disclosure + /wiki/methodology. Machine-only surfacing (no visible indicator) is NOT permitted.
§7.4 (no legal advice), citation integrity, no-fabrication, the re-derivability surfaces, and the audited draft→published gate are unchanged by this revision.
During the 30-day window (2026-06-29 to 2026-07-29), comments may be submitted by email to editorial@policywindow.org (subject "Charter §7.9 disclosure-presentation comment (2026-07)"), or as public dissent under the §7.2 procedure. No comment is dispositive; the editorial board makes the final decision after weighing the public record.
0 comments received as of 2026-06-29 (window-open date). Comments are appended here as they arrive, with the editorial-board response logged alongside.
git log diff; until then every article keeps its current prose disclosure.charter-revision.Per the §8 amendment procedure, an independent-review amendment needs an editorial board of ≥3 named editors; until that threshold is reached, any decision is recorded with an explicit acknowledgement that no fully-independent panel was available + who reviewed. Any founder decision ahead of the window close is disclosed here per §7.2/§8, not hidden.
DECISION — Option A (machine-only) adopted by founder decision on 2026-07-06.
Adopted ahead of the 2026-07-29 comment-window close and against the editorial-board recommendation (Option B, a compact visible chip). This is recorded plainly, not framed as a cleanup: the per-article §7.9/§7.10 prose-provenance is now disclosed machine-readably(the
data-prose-provenanceattribute) + on /wiki/ai-disclosure, replacing the visible per-tier chip — a genuine reduction in the prominence of the disclosure. The §7.11/§7.12 catalog-authorship footer disclosure (a separate safeguard under §7.12(d)) is unchanged. This decision record is retained at this URL permanently.