Skip to the page
Home Search
Reading

These start from your device’s own settings. Change one here and this browser will remember it for this site.

  • The drawings appear finished instead of drawing themselves on.
  • Darker ink, firmer rules, and the foxing lifted off the paper.
  • More air between the lines and between paragraphs.
  • Scales the whole sheet — the lines, the gaps and the measure — from whatever size your browser is already set to.
  • The first four also set the reading face, because they have a real italic. The rest change the headings and leave Newsreader to read.
Drawers
Two cohabitating modes

The attribution ledger

Every quotation, whose it is, and the day somebody read the primary.

This page is the working ledger, generated from ATTRIBUTIONS.md in the repository rather than retyped from it, so the copy you are reading cannot drift from the copy a session edits. Its risk is a wrong attribution, and the entries below are what a reader has instead of taking our word for it.

The ledger for every quotation and credited idea on this site: what we quoted, whose it is, where it came from, and the day somebody read the primary and confirmed the wording.

Why this file exists. Star Stuff keeps a FACTCHECK.md because its risk is a wrong fact. This site's risk is a wrong attribution — a definition trimmed to fit, an object generalized, a paraphrase left wearing somebody's name. Queering Earth re-reads other people's work, so nearly every page carries somebody else's words, and the citation is the only evidence a reader has.

A search of our own library is not verification. See the credit-source skill.

What that rule is aimed at, and what it is not (added 2026-09-08). It is aimed at our own prose — a glossary gloss, a summary, a paraphrase — being read back later as somebody else's wording. That is the Kelly-on-Eno scenius failure: the thing being confirmed was a rewrite, and five files agreeing with each other were one witness.

It is not a rule that Ryan's quote collection is unusable. A direct quotation he transcribed from a paper he read, published with a citation to that paper, is a first-hand reading with the source named. Papers get rented, access lapses, and refusing to quote anything we cannot re-open today would discard years of legitimate collecting and quietly imply he did not read what he says he read.

So: re-reading is an upgrade, not a precondition. Where the primary is reachable, read it and say which copy — that is how the Jack edition difference below was found. Where it is not, quote it with the citation attached and name whose transcription it is. The citation is the thing that has to be right.

Verified Link to this section

Metaphoray (draft, not yet accessioned) — a coinage confirmed at the primary, a gloss that was ours, and two citations lifted, read 22 September 2026 Link to this section

Quoted on: Metaphoray, a draft in progress, byline Helen Edgar. Not yet accessioned, so it carries no number, no stamp and no card.

Robin Wall Kimmerer, Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom, Scientific Knowledge and the Teachings of Plants (Minneapolis: Milkweed Editions, 2013), 46–47, in the chapter "Asters and Goldenrod". One quotation is mounted whole: "When botanists go walking the forests and fields looking for plants, we say we are going on a foray. When writers do the same, we should call it a metaphoray, and the land is rich in both." Read at the primary rather than from a secondary account — Ryan supplied the page itself on 22 September 2026, which settled three things at once that a search could not: that the coinage is genuinely hers, that it sits on page 46 in the goldenrod-and-asters chapter exactly where the draft placed it, and what she actually wrote.

A SEARCH SAID THE WORD WAS NOT IN THAT CHAPTER AND THE PAGE SAID IT WAS. Secondary sources gloss the coinage correctly but none of them names the chapter, and a chapter summary that does not mention a word is not evidence the word is absent. This session drew the wrong conclusion from that silence and was corrected by the book. Worth keeping as a shape: an absent mention in a summary is not an absence in the text, which is the same error as concluding an absent search result means an absent library.

The draft's gloss of the word was broader than Kimmerer's own and the sheet now marks the difference. She defines a metaphoray as the writer's walk, gathering metaphors, parallel to the botanist's foray for plants. The draft had it as "a journey taken not to extract a fact but to carry meaning from one register of knowing into another and back again" — a reading of what the word could hold, and a good one, but hers only by inheritance. The sheet mounts her sentence whole and then says in its own voice that the extension is the sheet's. This is the tightened-source failure running the other way — broadened rather than trimmed, attribution left attached — and it is the reason the specimen block sits directly above the extension rather than anywhere else on the page.

A claim about bees was dropped. The draft glossed the extension as "the way she describes bees moving between flowers with no obligation to rank one bloom against the other". The bees in that chapter are there because purple and yellow are complementary and therefore more visible to a pollinator together than apart; refusing to rank is not what the passage says. Nothing replaced it, because the argument does not need it.

Gregory Cajete, Native Science: Natural Laws of Interdependence (Santa Fe: Clear Light, 2000), quoted at one remove. The four aspects — "with all four aspects of our being: mind, body, emotion, and spirit" — are quoted from Kimmerer's sentence reporting him, page 46, and the sheet says so on its face. The quotation marks belong to her wording, not his, which is the distinction a reader cannot recover if we do not draw it.

Cheryl Bartlett, Murdena Marshall and Albert Marshall, "Two-Eyed Seeing and other lessons learned within a co-learning journey of bringing together indigenous and mainstream knowledges and ways of knowing," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences 2, no. 4 (2012): 331–340, doi:10.1007/s13412-012-0086-8. Read at the primary on 22 September 2026, after Ryan put two copies in the tray, which retired the caveat this entry carried for one day saying nobody here had read it. The journal prints indigenous lower case in its own title; the draft had tidied it to a capital and the sheet now matches the paper, because a title is a quotation and house style does not reach inside one.

TWO COPIES, AND THE DIFFERENCE IS FORMAT RATHER THAN TEXT. One is the published first page as the journal serves it; the other is the authors' e-offprint, twelve pages, stamped Author's personal copy, and it is the only one carrying the body, so it is the copy actually read. Same DOI, same pagination, and their abstracts are identical character for character — checked rather than assumed, because two editions is exactly the situation where a difference hides.

THE DRAFT HAD ELDER ALBERT MARSHALL SAYING "FOR THE BENEFIT OF ALL WHO COME AFTER". THE PAPER SAYS "FOR THE BENEFIT OF ALL". The phrase who come after appears nowhere in it. This is the failure this file exists for, in its purest form: four words added to a living Elder's articulation of his own people's concept, carrying a seven-generations sense that is plausible, adjacent, and not what he is reported as saying. The sheet now quotes the reported wording whole: "learning to see from one eye with the strengths of Indigenous knowledges and ways of knowing, and from the other eye with the strengths of Western knowledges and ways of knowing, and to using both these eyes together, for the benefit of all".

AND ETUAPTMUMK IS NOT IN THE PAPER AT ALL. Zero occurrences in either copy. The draft named the Mi'kmaw word and cited this article for it, which sends a reader to a place the word is not. The term is Marshall's and travels with him — the Institute for Integrative Science & Health's own materials and later work use it — but none of that has been read here, so the sheet names the word and cites nothing for it rather than pointing at a source that would not bear it out. An open gap is honest; a citation that does not contain what it is cited for is not.

What is still at one remove: the paper reports what Albert Marshall explains rather than printing him in the first person, so even read at the primary this is his co-authors' account of his words. The sheet says so.

A posthumanism claim was carrying Kimmerer's name and has had the citation removed. The draft attached "(Kimmerer, 2013)" to the statement that the human was never a separate, bounded observer standing outside the systems it studies. That is real posthumanist argument and it is not in Braiding Sweetgrass; Barad and Haraway are where it lives. It was not re-pointed at a book nobody here has opened — the citation came off and the gap is declared, because inventing a plausible source is the failure this file exists to prevent.

A stimming claim cited to Walker has been lifted pending verification. The draft cited Neuroqueer Heresies for stimming as embodied regulation and communication. The book is not the obvious home for that claim and it has not been checked, so the citation came off and the sentence stands unsourced and marked. Walker is still cited where the argument is demonstrably his, which is neuroqueer theory.

Nick Walker, Neuroqueer Heresies: Notes on the Neurodiversity Paradigm, Autistic Empowerment, and Postnormal Possibilities (Fort Worth: Autonomous Press, 2021). The sheet drafted a sentence saying the book's subtitle is where this site's masthead phrase comes from. That is the one thing the existing entry below refuses to say — Helen wrote the phrase in the founding brainstorm, post-normal has a separate lineage in Funtowicz and Ravetz, and the settled position claims nothing about how the phrase reached us. The sentence was rewritten to the settled position before the draft was pushed. A new sheet restating an old finding is a place a settled nuance quietly gets lost, and it nearly did here.

Dinah Murray, Mike Lesser and Wenn Lawson, "Attention, Monotropism and the Diagnostic Criteria for Autism," Autism 9, no. 2 (2005): 139–156, doi:10.1177/1362361305051398, and the journal's byline is not the name he uses. Same paper already logged for Held, Not Fixed; the byline note is carried across rather than re-litigated.

Damian E. M. Milton, "On the ontological status of autism: the 'double empathy problem'," Disability & Society 27, no. 6 (2012): 883–887, doi:10.1080/09687599.2012.710008. Cited for the double empathy problem, which is his.

Sheet No. 14 — a zine's sourcing inherited rather than re-walked, and the reading built on top of it, read 14 September 2026 Link to this section

Quoted on: Known and Felt and Seen, Sheet No. 14.

THE PARTON QUOTATIONS WERE TRACED TO THEIR PRIMARIES FOR STAR STUFF AND ARE NOT RE-WALKED HERE. This is a deliberate departure and it is Ryan's call, 14 September 2026: the same material was primary-sourced thoroughly for No One Had to Qualify, Stimpunks Zine No. 67, and re-reading it for a second site in the same house would be ceremony rather than verification. The trail is that zine's Sources & what is ours, which names the edition and the page for each. What is new on this sheet is the reading, not the evidence. The four quotations inherited that way are the 1984 Interview conversation with Andy Warhol; the USA Today remark on the response to Travelin' Thru; the Billboard remark of 2020, taken as Cottom quotes and reads it; and the two passages from Dolly: My Life and Other Unfinished Business (HarperCollins, 1994) at pp. 297–298, read in the Internet Archive scan.

Tressie McMillan Cottom, The Dolly Moment: Why We Stan A Post-Racism Queen, essaying, 25 February 2021 — re-read at the primary for this sheet, not inherited. <https://tressie.substack.com/p/the-dolly-moment>. The post is free, so there was no reason not to, and all four quotations were matched against her own text character by character: the stylized drag of a fallen Southern belle sentence, the closing knowing what we love does not diminish who we love, only how we choose to love them, a repertoire to triangulate the stigmatization of my blackness, and ever the artist of misperception. A copy is in the SKS inbox. The essay is not a takedown and the sheet says so, because quoting only the sharp half of it would be the tightening this ledger exists to catch — she spent months on the piece and says in it what Parton gave her.

Tressie McMillan Cottom on legibility, Why I Hate California, essaying, 26 June 2021. The passage distinguishing legibility from visibility — a thing that exists but that is also supposed to exist — is the hinge of the whole reading. Read by Ryan in the post itself, which is a subscriber post, and quoted here with the citation attached and his reading named, per this file's own standing rule: a direct quotation he transcribed from something he read, published with a citation to it, is a first-hand reading with the source named. Re-reading is an upgrade, not a precondition. The ellipsis on the sheet closes a gap of two sentences and is marked as ours.

Dolly Parton at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 2 March 2021 — the re-tooled couplet she sang in the chair before her first dose. Two lines, quoted briefly for commentary and criticism, and no further lyric is reproduced — the song underneath is in copyright and the sheet says so on its face. Sourced for Zine No. 67 along with the surrounding facts: the million dollars to Vanderbilt in April 2020, and Mark Denison, who led the research, on its role in the critical early stages.

The Lancet's retraction and the GMC erasure, both 2010. Matters of public record, and on this sheet they are load-bearing rather than decorative: the whole point of the section is that a determination was formally withdrawn and went on working anyway. The retracted paper is not cited, named or linked, and that is deliberate — the sheet's argument is about the claim's persistence after withdrawal, and a citation would be the one thing that puts the old slip back into circulation.

Lenora Ross on the 1974 disc jockey convention in Nashville, quoted at Hillbilly-Music.com. A secondary source and named as one. It is on the sheet because it is the smallest instance of the sheet's argument and the only one in the voice of the person it happened to.

Emily Dickinson, That Love is all there is — J1765 in Thomas H. Johnson's numbering, Fr1747 in R. W. Franklin's. Public domain. Mounted whole, four lines, because a poem cropped is the defect this cabinet is organised against. The point of mounting it is that Parton misquotes it, on p. 297, as The only thing I know about love is that love is all there is — which keeps the warmth and drops the epistemics. The sheet says plainly that this is an ordinary human thing to do to a sentence somebody loves, and does not use it to score a point.

THE ARGUMENT THIS SHEET INHERITS IS NAMED RATHER THAN ABSORBED. The eligibility-criterion reading, the a gate sorts as well as rations argument, the observation about the Dickinson paraphrase, and the Nashville property correction are all Star Stuff's, from Zine No. 67. What is this sheet's own is the botanical turn: weed as a verdict rather than a rank, the determination slip as the instrument, and the pairing of those with Cottom's legibility distinction. That pairing came out of Ryan's own working note in the Stimpunks Knowledge System, not from any of the sources quoted.

Sheet No. 13 — a rhyme with no attribution at all, and a reading cited to a paper that does not make it, read 13 September 2026 Link to this section

Quoted on: Held, Not Fixed, Sheet No. 13.

Oliver Postgate, the opening narration to Bagpuss (Smallfilms for the BBC, 1974) — the six-line verse Emily speaks to wake the cat. Quoted from Smallfilms' own page, which prints the narration in full; that site is HTTP-only, and a copy is in the SKS inbox. It arrived on the draft with no attribution whatsoever, labelled only as a rhyme kept since childhood — which says out loud that the source was memory, and memory is where a tightened quotation comes from. Both circulating versions are wrong, in different directions. Postgate breaks it into six lines, hyphenates cat-puss, and capitalises only the first word of each line and the Oh; the reference works give Old Fat Furry Catpuss, capitalised throughout and unhyphenated, and run Wake up, be bright and Be golden and light together as one. The draft it came from set it lowercase with commas at the line ends. It is spoken narration and not a song, which matters because the songs in the series are somebody else's work: the folk songs were put together and performed by Sandra Kerr and John Faulkner, who also voiced Madeleine and Gabriel. Emily was played by Emily Firmin, daughter of the series' co-creator Peter Firmin. Thirteen episodes, 12 February to 7 May 1974, repeated until 1986; the BBC's own page is at <https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000wqbd>.

Maura C. Flannery, The Herbarium as Muse: Plant Specimens as Inspiration, Biology International 53 (2013), 23–34 — the source for Beuys, Dion and Klee. The draft cited it as "n.d."; the year is 2013. The paper was already in the SKS inbox and sks-search missed it because it had not been indexed yet, which is exactly the case the house rules warn about — read the tray before concluding a source is unreachable. Quoted directly twice, for the type specimen being the one "upon which the description of a species is based" and for Dion exhibiting prints and leaving "the place for the species name blank". Klee's herbarium — ten years, 1920 to 1930, mounted without labels on hand-painted paper — reaches us through her from Baumgartner and Moe, In Paul Klee's Enchanted Garden (2008).

THE READING OF THE TYPE SPECIMEN IS NOT FLANNERY'S AND WAS CITED TO HER. The draft attached "(Flannery, n.d.)" to the claim that the type is a single example against which every other plant is measured and found more or less faithful to the ideal, and that this is how a "normal" mind gets defined. Her paper contains no instance of ideal, standard, normal or deviation. What she writes is that the type is the specimen "upon which the description of a species is based", and that it is sometimes a drawing rather than a dried plant. The botany is hers; the argument is Helen Edgar's, and it is a good one, which is exactly why it must not wear somebody else's name. The sheet now cites Flannery for her sentence and lets the reading stand as its own.

Dinah Murray, Mike Lesser and Wenn Lawson, Attention, monotropism and the diagnostic criteria for autism, Autism 9(2), 139–156, <https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361305051398>. Monotropism was used on the draft without crediting anybody. It is a coinage with named originators, used in the sense they gave it. The third author is Wenn Lawson and the journal's byline is not the name he uses; see the entry on monotropa-uniflora.html for why we cite him as Wenn and do not reproduce the byline. Helen keeps a resource page at Autistic Realms; Fergus Murray keeps monotropism.org.

Ole Worm, Museum Wormianum (Leiden: ex officina Elseviriorum, 1655) — two plates. The frontispiece engraved by G. Wingendorp, and the woodcut on printed page 283 of the narwhal skull with the tusk still attached. Public domain — the item's own rights statement reads "Public domain. The BHL considers that this work is no longer under copyright protection." Scanned by Smithsonian Libraries, sponsored by the Biodiversity Heritage Library, Internet Archive item MuseumWormianum00Worm. The rights were read at the item and not taken from the blog post that led us there, which states none. The narwhal leaf was located by full-text searching the scan for Unicornu and confirmed against the printed folio. It is cited to the Internet Archive leaf rather than to a BHL page id, because BHL sits behind a bot wall and the id could not be verified; a guessed citation is worse here than an inconsistent one. Both full pages are in the SKS inbox with a provenance note.

The Ole Worm date is 1638, when he matched the horn to a narwhal's skull; Museum Wormianum was published posthumously in 1655 by his son. The draft attached no source to this claim and it is not in Flannery.

Sheet No. 12 — six sources, and one term that nearly went out meaning its opposite, read 12 September 2026 Link to this section

Quoted on: Every Day's Most Quiet Need, Sheet No. 12.

Elizabeth Barrett Browning, Sonnet 43 of Sonnets from the Portuguese (1850) — the whole sonnet, public domain. She died in 1861, so the poem has been out of copyright for well over a century. Text as the Academy of American Poets prints it, which is the copy Ryan brought to the sheet. Mounted entire; the close reading is of lines 1–6.

Aldous Huxley, Brave New World (1932), chapter 3 — one sentence, spoken by Mustapha Mond. "Impulse arrested spills over, and the flood is feeling, the flood is passion, the flood is even madness: it depends on the force of the current, the height and strength of the barrier. The unchecked stream flows smoothly down its appointed channels into a calm well-being."

No printed copy was opened; the wording was confirmed by full-text search across scanned editions, which is weaker than reading the book and is recorded as such. Two things came out of doing it rather than trusting the transcription. The house copy said "calm well being" and the printed editions carry "calm well-being", and the hyphen is now on the sheet. And the surrounding text — Lenina and Fanny in the changing room, cut against Mond's lecture — places it in chapter 3's intercut montage, which is what lets the sheet say who is speaking. That attribution is load-bearing: the sheet's argument depends on Mond being the villain and on his describing longing in order to justify abolishing it.

Gabriel García Márquez, Love in the Time of Cholera (1985), translated by Edith Grossman (Knopf, 1988) — four passages. The diagnosis ("the symptoms of love were the same as those of cholera"), the cure refused, "one love for everyday use," and the last two lines of the novel.

Grossman is credited by name on every one of them, and that is not a courtesy. The English wording is hers. "One love for everyday use" is a translator's phrase, and it is the phrase the sheet's argument turns on — it is what rhymes with Browning's "every day's / Most quiet need." Crediting only García Márquez would put her choices in his mouth, which is this file's characteristic failure wearing a respectable hat.

Found in one copy, paginated from another, and both are named. All four passages were read in full in a scanned PDF Ryan holds and checked character for character against it. That scan is an unauthorised copy with no usable pagination, so it can support the wording and nothing else.

The page numbers come from Ryan's Vintage International ebook, read off the page on 12 September 2026:

passagepage
"the symptoms of love were the same as those of cholera"58
the cure refused — linden blossoms, and enjoying his martyrdom58
"one love for everyday use"198
"Forever," he said.345, the last page of the novel

The map was checked before it was trusted. A reader that shows "Page 58 of 346" may be reporting a publisher-supplied print page map or may be generating pages from the reader's own font size and window width, and the two look identical on screen. Ryan changed the text size and the numbers did not move, which settles it: this is the book's pagination and not the device's. A number that shifted with a font setting would have been worse than none — exact-looking and unreproducible for anybody else.

Both copies are named in the citations because neither is sufficient alone: Knopf 1988 is where Grossman's translation was first published, and the Vintage International edition is where these page numbers live. The sheet says the same thing on its own face in what it does not settle.

Two transcriptions were confirmed against the screenshots, not just against the scan: Grossman's US spelling immunized in the "everyday use" sentence, and "to enjoy his martyrdom" closing the linden-blossom passage.

Helen Edgar, Monotropism, Limerence And Autistic ADHD Experiences, Autistic Realms, 12 February 2026 — one paragraph, on the Lake of Limerence. Read in the SKS mirror of her site. The Lake of Limerence and the River of Monotropic Flow States are both named in the alt text of the Map of Monotropic Experiences, which Helen developed with Stimpunks, so the lake-and-river contrast the sheet builds on is drawn from our own map rather than invented for the occasion.

Attlee Hall, Autistic "Memory-Foaming" — one sentence, and the term itself. "It's much easier to read, and become, the room than it is to try to read my own instincts." Read in Ryan's commonplace entry, which carries Hall's definition in full with the link.

This one is recorded as a near-miss, because it is the exact failure this file exists to catch. A draft of the sheet used memory-foaming to mean fond or magnified memory — the sense the compound suggests if you have not read the source. Hall's term means the opposite of a memory: it is self-loss by moulding to another person, conceding and bending to the point of self-alienation. Loosening somebody's coinage one notch to fit the sentence you wanted, with their name still attached, is a tightened attribution in the other direction. It was caught by opening the source rather than by trusting the phrase, before anything shipped.

Bernard Rose, Immortal Beloved (1994) — one speech, spoken by Gary Oldman as Beethoven. Supplied by Ryan from the film. Credited to Rose and not to Beethoven, on the sheet and here: it is a screenwriter's invention placed in a historical mouth, about a piece the real Beethoven left no comment on, and the sheet says so in the paragraph after the quotation.

Two recordings are embedded, and both are the rightsholders' own deliveries — verified through the upload metadata before mounting, not inferred from the channel name.

The film scene is linked and not embedded, and that is a relaxation of the policy. No official clip or licensed excerpt of Immortal Beloved could be found. Ryan's call, recorded in the register and on the sheet. The reasoning that carries it: a link is a request the reader makes and an embed is a request the page makes on their behalf, so the two are not the same act and do not need the same permission.

Dorothy Tennov, Love and Limerence: The Experience of Being in Love (Stein and Day, 1979) — read first-hand on 12 September 2026, in the Scarborough House edition of 1999, which reprints the 1979 text with a new preface. Ryan put a scan in the SKS inbox after the sheet was built, and opening it changed the sheet in four places.

Opening Tennov corrected an attribution the sheet was about to publish. The draft said Tennov "described the crystallisation that idealises the limerent object." She does describe it. She did not coin it — Stendhal did, in De l'Amour (1822), and Tennov attributes it to him explicitly on her p. 30, calling it the metaphorical term "he gave" and retelling his image of the branch left in a salt mine. It had reached us through a summary that named only Tennov. This is the second near-miss on this one sheet, after memory-foaming, and both have the same cause: a term met in a secondary source and carried forward without opening the primary. Corrected on the sheet, and stated there rather than quietly fixed.

What is still at one remove, and it is now a shorter list. Dinah Murray, Wenn Lawson and Mike Lesser on monotropism (2005); McDonnell and Milton on "clumping" (2014); Anissa Ljanta on limerence as a coping strategy (2024). All three reached this sheet through Helen Edgar's essay, which cites them properly. No primary among those three was opened here. Said plainly on the sheet as well as here, because a reader checking us should not have to guess which citations we stand behind first-hand.

Elizabeth Brake, Minimizing Marriage (Oxford University Press, 2012) — the term amatonormativity, credited for the concept only. Not quoted, and the book has not been read here. The sheet uses the word for the assumption it names and attributes it to her; nothing is put in her words.

Sheet No. 11 — two plates and two recordings, added 11 September 2026 Link to this section

Both paintings are Vincent van Gogh's, and both are public domain — he died in 1890, so the works have been out of copyright for more than a century. Neither is a borrowed reading; both are the objects the sheet is already arguing about, which is the standard /how-we-quote sets for a quotation and the one a plate should meet too.

Both copies came from Wikimedia Commons at 1280px, not from the museums directly, and the figcaptions say so. That is a rendition of a digitisation, not the canvas and not the museum's own master, and the distinction is worth keeping: what is public domain is the painting, and what we are serving is somebody else's photograph of it, at a size we chose. The licence on both Commons files is recorded as public domain, with Van Gogh named as the artist.

A note on the alt text. Both descriptions say what is in the picture and decline to say what it means — the sunflowers one records that half the heads have gone over, and the almond one that the tree has no trunk and no ground, because those are facts about the canvas. The reading is the sheet's job and it is in the prose, where a reader who cannot see the plate gets it on the same terms as one who can.

Two recordings are embedded, and neither is ours.

Both video ids were verified to resolve before they were mounted, through YouTube's oEmbed endpoint, and the first id a search returned for "Polly" did not resolve at all. A dead embed on a sheet is a citation to nothing.

One lyric is quoted; one is not, and the two are different decisions.

Townes Van Zandt, "Waitin' Around to Die" — the fifth verse, less its closing refrain, three lines, on #galveston. Recorded for For the Sake of the Song (Poppy, 1968) and performed in the 1975 film embedded beside it. Text supplied by Ryan from Genius, which is NMPA-licensed, and checked by him against the recording. That is the standard /how-we-quote asks for and it is why this one is here: the first draft of the sheet declined to quote it, because the session writing it had no licensed text in front of it and this file does not record quotations nobody read.

It is three lines of a five-verse song, it is not the refrain, and every line of it is discussed on the page — the policy's three tests. The refrain is the song's title line and the most quotable thing in it, which is exactly why it is the part left out.

Nirvana, "Polly" — no lyric, and verification is not the reason. Ryan has offered to supply a checked text and could do so in minutes. The reason the sheet quotes none is stated on its own face: every word of that song is spoken by the man who committed the crime. Cobain wrote it in the abductor's first person deliberately, so that a listener has no position to occupy but his. Mounting those words as a .qe-specimen would give a rapist's speech the same ruled box, display face and herbarium label this cabinet gives to Woolf and to Plath, on the one sheet that also carries the account of two men singing them at a real girl. The recording is linked whole instead.

This is recorded as a decision, not a gap, and it is Ryan's to reverse. If the wording goes on the page it should go on deliberately and with the mounting thought about, rather than arriving because a lyric became available.

The background to "Polly" is sourced, not remembered: the August 1987 abduction in Tacoma, the escape at a filling station, Cobain's choice of the perpetrator's voice, and his line that what needs doing is "teaching men not to rape" were read on Wikipedia's article for the song on 11 September 2026. That is a tertiary source and it is marked as one here. The primary for the 1992 incident is the Incesticide sleeve, already recorded above.

Sheet No. 11 — four artists, five primaries, read 11 September 2026 Link to this section

Quoted on: My Gloomy Sunflowers, Sheet No. 11.

Every quotation below was read in the work it comes from, on 11 September 2026, by a session working from copies Ryan holds. Where a copy is imperfect that is said, because it changed the answer twice.

Hannah Gadsby, Nanette (2018) — the sunflowers passage. Ours is the wording that has stood on stimpunks.org since 2022, and it is the special's own. Credited to Gadsby by name and to the special, never to the platform.

Shoshana Kessock, "Falling/Burning" — "Hannah Gadsby told people artists don't have to suffer for their art, and I'll forever thank her for having the guts to stand up and say that to the world. Because I used to believe it was true." In Alice Wong, ed., Disability Visibility (Vintage, 2020); first published on Kessock's own site, 12 July 2018, under the title Falling/Burning: Hannah Gadsby, Nanette, and the Myth of the Mad Artist, where all three passages were confirmed at source.

This is a correction as well as a citation. stimpunks.org credits this passage to the anthology and links the Disability Visibility Project — absorbing a Disabled writer's byline into a book title, on an essay about being a bipolar creator. An open item for a session in that repo is recorded in DECISIONS.md.

Robert Earl Hardy, A Deeper Blue: The Life and Music of Townes Van Zandt (University of North Texas Press, 2008), read from the PDF in the SKS. Four quotations: the psychological report's "feminine elements" passage and the official diagnosis, both quoted by Hardy from the 1964 Titus Harris Clinic file; Fran Petters on the young doctor who left psychiatry; and Fran Petters on the rote memory.

The Army letter is deliberately given in both of its wordings, because Hardy gives both — the main text's "an acute schizophrenic and was only marginally adapting to life" and endnote 17's record of a March 1998 Texas Monthly piece in which the same witness recalls "an acute manic-depressive who has made minimal adjustments to life." Quoting either alone would be picking a witness's better take and calling it the record.

Vincent van Gogh, letters 855 and 857, read at vangoghletters.org, the Van Gogh Museum and Huygens Institute edition — the primary, free and complete. Letter 855 to his mother, Saint-Rémy, 19 February 1890; letter 857 to Theo, Saint-Rémy, on or about 17 March 1890, from which three passages are mounted in the order the letter has them, because the order is the argument.

Neither Van Gogh PDF in the SKS was used, and neither could have been. One is Volume II of the old three-volume English edition and stops in 1885; the other is a 19-page publisher's brochure for the 2009 six-volume edition. Recorded in DECISIONS.md.

Sylvia Plath, The Unabridged Journals of Sylvia Plath, ed. Karen V. Kukil (Anchor, 2000), entry of Friday, 20 June 1958, p. 395.

Quoted with "which ever" as two words and a spaced en dash, which is how Kukil sets it. Settled across three copies on 11 September 2026: the PDF in the SKS read on the page, the Kindle edition, and archive.org's search-inside of the print edition, which returns exactly one result for the phrase. The date carries no year in the journal and is derived: she records finishing at Smith "about 10 days ago, on Sunday June ist", and 1 June fell on a Sunday in 1958.

stimpunks.org closes the two words into one and the spaced en dash into an em dash, and cites the passage to a Poetry Foundation biography page rather than to the journal. A tightened quotation of the exact kind this file exists to catch, on our own site. Open item in DECISIONS.md.

Michael Azerrad, Come As You Are: The Story of Nirvana (Doubleday, 1993), read from the EPUB in the SKS. Three quotations: the hyperactivity and Ritalin passage; the scoliosis and the guitar; and the stomach specialists, ending on Azerrad's own "Ironically, Kurt's condition may have something to do with his agonized wail. Or vice versa." Kurt's "this manic depressive at nine years old" is his own words as Azerrad quotes them, and the sheet says so — a self-description, not a diagnosis. The words bipolar and attention deficit do not occur in the book, and the sheet says that too.

Kurt Cobain, liner notes to Incesticide (DGC, December 1992). Four passages: the Raincoats encounter, the list including the Saturday Night Live line, and — mounted together, as one quotation, because they are one sentence's worth of thought — the account of the rape and the request that follows from it. Splitting the request from its reason turns it into a slogan, which is what usually happens to it.

Read from a scan supplied by Ryan, which carries a fan-site watermark. The wording should be checked against a physical sleeve before this entry is called closed. Flagged on the sheet's own label rather than only here.

Octavia E. Butler — the Parable novels, and a preview that crossed a book boundary Link to this section

Quoted on: Other People Who Have It, Sheet No.&nbsp;10.

There are two Butlers on this site and they are not related. Judith Butler is credited below for a stylized repetition of acts. This entry is Octavia E. Butler, and every new entry for either has to carry the given name.

Eight quotations, from two novels. All eight read from the Kindle editions Ryan holds, off the pages themselves — Readwise syncs highlights from the device rather than transcribing them, so the wording is the edition's wording and not a typist's.

From Parable of the Sower:

He has always pretended, or perhaps believed, that my hyperempathy syndrome was something I could shake off and forget about.

I feel what I see others feeling or what I believe they feel.

I get a lot of grief that doesn't belong to me, and that isn't real. But it hurts.

Those three and the "family business" paragraph are p.&nbsp;11 and p.&nbsp;12. The biological-conscience passage is p.&nbsp;115, and the shared-pleasure passage runs pp.&nbsp;265–266.

From Parable of the Talents, all on p.&nbsp;9: the "every damned bruise" paragraph, "They refused to let me be handicapped," and "So why do I miss it now?"

THE TALENTS QUOTATIONS ARRIVED FILED AS SOWER, AT A PAGE NUMBER THAT WAS NOT A PAGE NUMBER, AND THAT IS THE ENTRY TO READ BEFORE CITING ANY EBOOK HERE. The Kindle file for Sower carries a publisher's preview of Talents after the novel ends and marks the join nowhere. Location 4758 is "decided to call this place Acorn," the last line of Sower; highlights run on to 5541. A Readwise export takes its title from the file, so highlights from two books arrive under one heading.

The tell is a page counter that stops. The reader shows "Page 330 of 330" at 85% of the file, because the print-page map covers Sower only and then repeats its own last page. So the brief's Parable of the Sower (p. 330) was wrong twice: wrong book, and a number that was never a page. Re-titling alone would have been worse than leaving it — right book, plausible number, no relation to the text. The real page came off the standalone Talents, which reads 9 of 394 under its own running head.

An appended preview is a second work inside one file, and every tool in the chain takes the file as the unit: page map, export title, highlight location. A citation is only as good as the assumption that one file is one book, and that assumption is quietly false at the end of most ebooks sold today.

Sources: Octavia E. Butler, Parable of the Sower, Kindle edition, ASIN B008HALO4Q; and Parable of the Talents, Kindle edition, ASIN B008HALPHC. The PDF held in the Stimpunks Knowledge System at inbox/Butler, Octavia - Parable of the Sower.pdf is not a usable verification copy: it is missing chapters 9 and 21 of 25, and its em-dashes are OCR-damaged.

Verified: 2026-09-10, from the reader's own pages.

Sami Schalk — Bodyminds Reimagined, and two clauses that differ from the novel Link to this section

Quoted on: Other People Who Have It, Sheet No.&nbsp;10.

Seven quotations, read from the chapter PDFs held in SKS. Page numbers are the printed folios, each confirmed against the running head at the foot of its own page: the Introduction at p.&nbsp;5; chapter 3 at pp.&nbsp;89, 92, 95, 96, 100 and 111.

The sheet leans hardest on this one, and quotes it whole because trimming it would make it a stronger claim than she made:

The nonrealist nature of hyperempathy, that is, the fact that it is not a disability we recognize in our current reality, disallows readers the ability to overlay preconceived notions about disabilities we recognize from our own world.

Two clauses of the biological-conscience passage read differently where Schalk quotes it than in the edition read here, and both cite Sower 115:

Butler, Kindle edition, p. 115Schalk, Bodyminds Reimagined, p. 99
"They could kill if they had to""They would kill if they had to"
"But if everyone could feel everyone else's pain""But if everyone else could feel everyone else's pain"

A third, at Sower 12: the doctors call it an "organic delusional syndrome" in the novel and an "organic delusion syndrome" at Schalk p.&nbsp;88.

Unresolved, and it is an edition question rather than a doubt about either party. This site has twice found a real difference between printings where it expected a slip — Woolf's 1926 against her 1930, above, and Rossetti's colon. One piece of evidence cuts the other way and is recorded so nobody re-derives it: the pagination agrees. Both land the passage on p.&nbsp;115, and a Kindle page map is keyed to a specific print setting, so two printings that agree on where p.&nbsp;115 falls are likelier to be one setting than to differ in three words of it. Suggestive, not conclusive.

The sheet quotes the novel, names its edition, and says on the page that Schalk's rendering differs. Neither disputed clause is one the argument rests on, and the sentence everything turns on — A biological conscience is better than no conscience at all — is identical in both. Settling it needs a 1993 or Seven Stories printing, which nobody here holds.

Sources: Sami Schalk, Bodyminds Reimagined: (Dis)ability, Race, and Gender in Black Women's Speculative Fiction, Duke University Press, 2018. Chapter PDFs held in SKS at inbox/9780822371830-001.pdf (Introduction) and inbox/9780822371830-004.pdf (chapter 3).

Verified: 2026-09-10. Stuart Murray and Susan Wendell are named on the sheet as Schalk cites them and are not quoted; Alison Kafer is her chapter epigraph and is not quoted here at all, because we have not read Feminist, Queer, Crip.

Kimber, Verrier and Connolly — the empathy study, and the year everything convenient got wrong Link to this section

Quoted on: Other People Who Have It, Sheet No.&nbsp;10.

However, a majority of participants reported experiencing hyper-empathy and extreme empathic responses. Seventy-eight percent of participants responded yes to the yes/no question about whether they had ever experienced hyper-empathy or extreme levels of empathy.

Often, this sense of distress was somatized as participants described it in terms of pain or other physical manifestation ("I feel nauseous"; "I feel empathy so much that it's painful"; "I feel physical pain in my body"; "I feel a horrible sensation in my body like my innards are being twisted").

As yet, however, there has been limited theoretical and empirical work looking at this as a specific phenomenon worthy of study in its own right.

pp.&nbsp;325, 325 and 326. Seventy-six Autistic participants.

THE ISSUE YEAR IS 2024 AND EVERYTHING CONVENIENT SAYS 2023 — the DOI slug aut.2023.0001, and the repository deposit record for the accepted manuscript. Second instance of a pattern, after Experiences of autistic joy, where 2025 was the online-first date and the issue was 2026. Online-first year is not issue year, and a DOI slug is not a date. A paper newly cited on this site takes its volume, issue, pages and year from a bibliographic database, never from the PDF, the DOI, or a deposit record.

Cite Mary Ann Liebert, not SAGE. Crossref returns SAGE because SAGE acquired the journal after publication; the article's own first page says Liebert. Name the imprint on the artefact, which is the reasoning that already makes a sheet name the printing it read.

The accepted manuscript may not supply a word of the wording. Both states are held, and the accepted text is the authors' British-spelled pre-copy-edit copy. The differences are not all orthographic: the abstract's Conclusion is a different sentence, "but to better bridge the gap" against "but also better bridge the gap." Anybody assuming the two differed only in -ise and -ize would have quoted it wrong while feeling careful.

And the version of record disagrees with itself on the headline figure, which is the detail a later hand is most likely to tidy: "Seventy-eight percent" in the Results at p.&nbsp;325, "seventy eight percent" where the Discussion restates it at p.&nbsp;326. The sheet quotes the Results occurrence. A sheet quoting both must reproduce both forms.

The participants are quoted with no identifiers at all — no pseudonym, number or demographic tag. This ledger credits study participants by the names their paper gives them where there are any; here there are none, so the sheet's caption says the anonymity is the paper's and not our omission. Those two look identical on the page.

Sources: Lesley Kimber, Diarmuid Verrier and Stephen Connolly, "Autistic People's Experience of Empathy and the Autistic Empathy Deficit Narrative," Autism in Adulthood 6, no.&nbsp;3 (2024): 321–330, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., doi:10.1089/aut.2023.0001. Version of record held in SKS at inbox/aut.2023.0001.pdf; accepted manuscript at inbox/Verrier-AutisticPeoplesExperience(AM).pdf.

Verified: 2026-09-10, from the version of record, with the citation corroborated in Crossref and in the NLM's PubMed record, PMID 39371354 — two libraries that index independently of each other.

David Gray-Hammond and Karla McLaren — Autistic hyper-empathy in the first person Link to this section

Quoted on: Other People Who Have It, Sheet No.&nbsp;10.

As you might imagine, the intersection between the experiences of hyper-empathy and mirror-touch synesthesia can be quite intense. Seeing someone injured themselves can trigger anything from a nervous jolt at the site of the person's injury, through feelings of every nerve in your body firing or literally feeling their pain.

David Gray-Hammond, Hyper-empathy, mirror-touch synesthesia, and the Autistic experience of pain, 24 July 2023. Cited at neurohubcommunity.org, which is where he publishes now; the emergentdivergence.com address the SKS bookmark carries is his old domain, and Ryan confirmed the move.

Their social issues arose not from a lack of empathy, but from an overpowering surplus of it. I knew what that was like. I had not landed in a world of aliens; I had dropped right into a community of fellow hyper-empaths who became my friends.

Karla McLaren, Autism, empathy, and the mind-blindness of everyday people. The emphasis on lack and surplus is hers. This is the quotation the sheet is named for: Lauren Olamina writes "I wish I could find other people who have it, and live among them," and McLaren describes having found them.

Sources and verification: 2026-09-10, from the fetched page text held in SKS. Both are at one remove and the sheet does not hide it — the Gray-Hammond copy is a bookmark capture rather than the live page, and the McLaren passage reaches us through the Stimpunks Empathy glossary, which is our own compilation. Each is a first-hand account by its author, quoted with the author named and linked, and neither is load-bearing for a fact — they are testimony that the experience is reported, which is what the sheet claims of them.

Our own prior art on hyperempathy, and a splice not to inherit Link to this section

Quoted on: Other People Who Have It, Sheet No.&nbsp;10, which cites the Stimpunks Foundation's Justice Sensitivity, Autistic Joy, Glimmers and Empathy glossary pages as ours.

This sheet continues an argument Stimpunks has already made, and says so. The Canary and Very Grand Emotions glossary pages have paired Butler's biological conscience with Autistic "cultural immune system" claims for years. Presenting the pairing as new would have been the site's own failure mode aimed at itself.

AND THOSE TWO PAGES CARRY A SPLICE THIS SHEET MUST NOT INHERIT. Both present "I wish I could find other people who have it, and live among them. A biological conscience is better than no conscience at all" and "Maybe it's like my sharing: One more weirdness…" as a single blockquote under a single citation. The two are about ninety pages apart and in the wrong order — Kindle locations 1565 and 350.

The splice changes the meaning. In context Lauren is comparing her emerging Earthseed conviction to her hyperempathy: the "one more weirdness… that I'm stuck with" is the religion, and hyperempathy is what she measures it against. Joined to the biological-conscience line it reads as though the weirdness she is stuck with is the conscience itself. Every word is Butler's, every sentence is exact, and the quotation says something Butler did not.

Not fixable from this repository. Recorded in DECISIONS.md for a session in the SKS repository, with the paths. This sheet quotes the two passages separately or not at all.

Verified: 2026-09-10, against the Sower PDF's chapter 4, which does hold the second passage.

The nine typefaces in the Reading panel Link to this section

Used on: every page, when a reader picks one. Self-hosted in fonts/.

How this was checked: every designer credit, licence file and source link is fetched from upstream by tools/make-fonts.mjs and recorded in tools/font-files.json; none is typed. check-metadata.mjs fails if a licence file goes missing, if a designer is unrecorded, or if the picker offers a face the font table does not have. Read 10 September 2026.

CUTE is not the OFL. Six of these are under Conditions d'Utilisation Typographiques Engageantes, which permits use, modification and commercial use, and states outright that it is "not technically compatible with any FLOSS license to date". It is explicit that it governs fonts and not the documents they set, so nothing on this site is relicensed by using them. Three of its conditions bind us and are met: the designers are credited with a link to the original publication source; the fonts ship whole rather than as lone extracted files; and no CUTE face is subsetted, because deleting the post-binary characters or the OpenType features that activate them is forbidden. Its donation condition was met by Stimpunks at the "for an association" tier on 10 September 2026.

The two typefaces — designers, and the licence that has to travel with them Link to this section

Used on: every page, self-hosted in fonts/

Both under the SIL Open Font Licence 1.1, with the licence text in fonts/Fraunces-OFL.txt and fonts/Newsreader-OFL.txt.

How this was checked: the copyright lines are the first line of each family's own upstream OFL.txt, and the designer credits come from each family's upstream METADATA.pb. Both are fetched by tools/make-fonts.mjs rather than typed, so the credit cannot drift from the files actually being served. Read 10 September 2026.

Why it is here at all. The fonts were self-hosted on 9 September to stop the site disclosing every reader's IP address to Google, and for a day they were redistributed with no licence file beside them — which the OFL does not permit. A public repository serving woff2 over HTTP is redistribution. Fixed 10 September, and check-metadata.mjs now fails if a family's licence file goes missing or its designer is unrecorded.

Nick Walker — neuroqueering as a verb Link to this section

Quoted on: index.html

I originally conceived of neuroqueer as a verb: neuroqueering as the practice of queering (subverting, defying, disrupting, liberating oneself from) neuronormativity and heteronormativity simultaneously.

Source: Nick Walker, Neuroqueer: An Introduction, neuroqueer.com. Collected in Neuroqueer Heresies (Autonomous Press, 2021).

Verified: 2026-09-07, by fetching the page and reading the sentence in context. Wording matches exactly, including "liberating oneself from" without a preceding "and".

Note — the paraphrase we did not ship. The working tagline for this site was "Subverting, defying, disrupting, and liberating oneself from all forms of normativity," credited to Walker. It is not his sentence. His parenthetical glosses queering, and his object is specific: "neuronormativity and heteronormativity." Walker does write, in Neuroqueer Heresies, that "anyone can liberate themselves from the strictures of normativity" — a different sentence, in a different place. Generalizing his object while keeping his name on the words would have put our paraphrase in his mouth on the masthead. The page now quotes him exactly, names the two normativities he named, and says plainly that carrying the verb further out is our extension and not hers.

Pronouns updated 2026-09-07. Nick Walker uses he/him. This entry, index.html, and DECISIONS.md were all written with she/her and have been corrected together.

Do not "fix" this back by checking the website. neuroqueer.com's about page carries no pronouns for Walker at all — it names him by role, not by pronoun — so the site neither confirms nor contradicts the change, and our own mirrored corpus is mixed. The change was made on Ryan Boren's word, which is the better authority: he works alongside Walker, and a person's stated preference outranks a stale third-party page every time. If a future session finds a pronoun-bearing primary that says otherwise, verify it against something Walker wrote or said about himself — not against our own files, and not against a bio somebody else maintains.

Virginia Woolf — On Being Ill, and the edition trap Link to this section

Quoted on: nothing yet. Verified ahead of the sheet, because the trap here is one that verification-after-drafting does not catch.

Woolf published On Being Ill in The New Criterion in January 1926 and revised it for the Hogarth Press edition of 1930. Both texts are hers. Neither is a corruption of the other, and a quotation is only correct once it is attached to the right one.

The 1930 text, read from the Hogarth Press edition:

…it becomes strange indeed that illness has not taken its place with love and battle and jealousy among the prime themes of literature.

…literature does its best to maintain that its concern is with the mind; that the body is a sheet of plain glass through which the soul looks straight and clear, and, save for one or two passions such as desire and greed, is null, and negligible and non-existent.

The 1926 text reads "with love, battle, and jealousy" and "is null, negligible and non-existent" — commas where 1930 has and. In the same paragraph 1926 has "brings to light" where 1930 has "brings to view," "uprooted in us in the act of sickness" where 1930 has "by the act of sickness," and the phrase "and infinitely more," which 1930 drops.

Why this is the entry to read before quoting anything on this site. The 1926 commas look exactly like a modern editor tidying Woolf's polysyndeton — the scenius failure, arriving on schedule. They are not. They are her own earlier sentence, and the and…and…and is her later one. Had we "corrected" the comma version against the 1930 text, or the reverse, we would have produced a quotation that is wrong while looking more careful than the alternative. On a site built on re-reading, a wrong edition is a wrong attribution. Name the edition, or do not quote.

Sources: Virginia Woolf, On Being Ill, The Hogarth Press, 1930 — read from the scan held in the Stimpunks Knowledge System at inbox/A14 - OnBeingIll-1930.pdf (Columbia University Libraries copy, the edition limited to 250 signed copies, type set by Woolf herself). Compared against the January 1926 New Criterion printing, held at raw/woolf-on-being-ill.pdf.

Verified: 2026-09-07, by extracting and reading both scans, not by searching our own library. The note in SKS at notes/Resources/Unsorted/2025/On Being Ill.md carries the 1926 wording under a title that does not name an edition, and its body text is OCR-mangled ("the b o d y is a sheet o f plain glass"). It is a pointer. It is not quotable.

Plate 511, The Floral Magazine v.9 (1870) Link to this section

Used on: coming-to-terms.html

A hand-coloured lithograph of two orchid blooms, mounted as the sheet's plate.

Source: The Floral Magazine, volume 9, London: L. Reeve & Co., 1870, plate 511. Drawn and lithographed by Worthington G. Smith; printed by Vincent Brooks, Day & Son. Public domain, so marked by the Biodiversity Heritage Library, which digitised it.

Verified: 2026-09-07. Public-domain status read from BHL's own statement on the item.

The artist's name was read off the plate, not out of the metadata, and that turned out to matter. BHL's Flickr tags on a neighbouring Curtis's plate credit artist:name=Walter Wood Fitch; the signature on that plate reads W. Fitch, and the illustrator of Curtis's in that period was Walter Hood Fitch. BHL's tag is wrong. The Floral Magazine plate we did use is signed Worthington G. Smith, F.L.S. del et lith in the bottom-left corner, and that signature — not the catalogue record — is what this credit is based on.

Standing note for any future plate. A digitiser's metadata is a finding aid, exactly like an SKS hit. The object carries its own attribution in the corner. Read the corner.

Nick Walker — Postnormal Possibilities, and our masthead Link to this section

Credited on: index.html — Queering is a verb, in prose. It was on the masthead too, from 2026-09-07 to 2026-09-13; see the re-determination below.

Not a quotation we made. A collision we found, and then said out loud.

The site's tagline is "Post-normal possibilities." The subtitle of Walker's book is Notes on the Neurodiversity Paradigm, Autistic Empowerment, and Postnormal Possibilities — verified 2026-09-07 against neuroqueer.com. One hyphen apart, on a site that quotes Walker on its home page, about the subject of his book.

Helen Edgar wrote the phrase in the founding brainstorm and may well have arrived at it herself; post-normal also has a separate lineage in post-normal science (Funtowicz and Ravetz, early 1990s) which nobody here has yet checked against the primary. So this is not a finding of borrowing. It is a finding that DECISIONS.md was asserting there was no risk here when there plainly is one, and that assertion has been corrected.

Resolved 2026-09-07: the masthead credits him. It read after Nick Walker, linked to the book, with the full account in the section where Walker is already quoted. The page says he published it first, which is true, and claims nothing about how the phrase reached us, which nobody can honestly claim either way.

After was chosen over "his phrase" — which would take the coinage off Helen — and over silence, which was defensible only until a reader noticed the subtitle. The separate lineage in post-normal science is real (Funtowicz and Ravetz, "Science for the post-normal age," Futures, September 1993, checked 2026-09-07) and is not on the page, because it reads as a hedge on a credit that was freely given.

Re-determined 2026-09-13, on Ryan's word: the masthead line comes off, and the credit stays. The paragraph above describes a second line under the tagline reading after Nick Walker, linked to the book. It was there from 2026-09-07 to 2026-09-13, and it is gone. Three words cannot carry that paragraph, and readers finished the sentence themselves — three of them, three different ways, from the same masthead: as a death notice, as an endorsement, and as a declaration that this site runs on one person's theory. The third is the one that decided it. A cabinet that reads through many lenses had appeared to be running on one, in the first four words anybody meets.

Nothing about the attribution changed, only where it is made. The paragraph under Queering is a verb has carried the whole of it since 2026-09-07 — the subtitle quoted, the hyphen named, he published it first, and no claim about the route the phrase took. That is where a credit of this shape belongs, because it needs a sentence and the masthead had room for a label. A three-word credit that three readers each completed differently is not a shorter version of the paragraph; it is a different claim, and a worse one. After is still the right word where there is room for it, and it still stands in the moth's caption below.

Nick Walker and Ezra Furman — the moth, the Earth, and two colours Link to this section

Credited on: index.html — the figure at the foot of Queering is a verb, in the caption under the drawing. Also described on the design sheet.

Not a quotation. An homage, which is a thing this ledger has to hold too, because an uncredited homage is a borrowing with our name on it.

What was borrowed, from whom. The cover of Walker's Neuroqueer Heresies (Autonomous Press, 2021) sets a human brain where a swallowtail butterfly's body would be. Our drawing sets the Earth there instead. The composition is his book's; the substitution is ours, and it is the site's own name — Queering Earth — as a picture.

The colours are Ezra Furman's, from Lilac and Black on Twelve Nudes (Bella Union, 2019):

We wear the lilac and black

Verified: 2026-09-09. The book's subtitle and cover were confirmed against neuroqueer.com on 2026-09-07 for the masthead credit (see Postnormal Possibilities, above); the same page carries the cover image. The Furman line was supplied by Ryan with the Genius link, and the caption quotes no more of the song than the two colour words it takes.

What the caption says, and why it says that much. After the cover of Nick Walker's Neuroqueer Heresies, which sets a human brain where a swallowtail's body would be, and after Ezra Furman's Lilac and Black. Ours is a moth, and the Earth is where the brain was.

Three things are load-bearing in it. "After" — the same word the masthead uses for Walker, and for the same reason: it credits without claiming his authorship of what we made. Naming the brain — because a reader who does not know the cover cannot otherwise see that the Earth is a substitution, and the substitution is the whole idea. And "ours is a moth" — because it is not the cover's swallowtail, and saying so is cheaper and more honest than a drawing that pretends to be one. The moth has no tails for exactly that reason.

Two tokens were named after the borrowing. --qe-lilac and --qe-lilac-pale entered the palette for this drawing, and the comment beside them in queering.css says where they came from. A colour cannot be attributed the way a sentence can — nobody owns lilac — but the pairing is Furman's line, and the tokens are the reason it now recurs across the site.

What the two colours are for, added 2026-09-09. Furman has said, of the song: "So I wrote this theme song for us, and gave us some gang colors: lilac and black." Us is trans women; the statement around that sentence is about solidarity and about being ready to defend one another's lives against a concerted political effort to make trans existence unliveable — Furman, in Clash, supplied by Ryan. Recorded here because a palette borrowed without its reason is a palette that will eventually be described as a nice purple, and because the site now wears these colours in two drawings. They are not decorative in origin.

James Shelton — Lilac Wine, and two singers who did not write it Link to this section

Credited on: index.html — the caption under the lilac bush above the footer.

Not a quotation. A credit, and the reason it needed one is the ordinary version of this site's characteristic failure.

The song reaches most people through Nina Simone (Wild Is the Wind, 1966) or Jeff Buckley (Grace, 1994). It is neither of theirs. James Shelton wrote words and music in 1950, for a Broadway revue called Dance Me a Song that ran a few weeks, where Hope Foye introduced it. Eartha Kitt recorded it in 1953 — thirteen years before Simone, forty-one before Buckley.

Verified: 2026-09-09, against the song's record and Shelton's). This is a secondary source and is named as one. The primary would be the 1950 copyright registration or the sheet music, and neither was reachable from here; the caption claims only what the credit line claims — who wrote it, when, and for what.

Why it is in this ledger at all. A cover so much better known than its original that the original stops being named is the same motion as a definition trimmed to fit a masthead: the work survives and the maker falls off it. Nobody invents anything; the attribution just quietly evaporates. So the caption names Shelton first and calls the other two readings, which is what they are — and which is the argument this whole site is built on. One song, read three ways.

T. S. Eliot — The Waste Land, lines 1–4 Link to this section

Quoted on: index.html — mounted whole above the lilac bush.

April is the cruellest month, breeding Lilacs out of the dead land, mixing Memory and desire, stirring Dull roots with spring rain.

Source: T. S. Eliot, The Waste Land (1922), lines 1–4, opening "I. The Burial of the Dead". Cited to the Poetry Foundation.

Verified: 2026-09-09. The Poetry Foundation refuses automated requests (HTTP 403), so the wording was checked against Project Gutenberg's transcription of the 1922 text. Both the source of the citation and the source of the check are named on the page, because they are not the same document and pretending otherwise would be the kind of tidy-looking claim this file exists to prevent.

Public domain in the United States (published 1922), so the four lines are mounted whole. That matters here: this site's stated risk is the tightened quotation, and an excerpt short enough to need no ellipsis is an excerpt with nothing to hide.

"Cruellest" keeps its British spelling. House style is US, and house style stops at the quotation mark.

Whose association it is. Helen Edgar's — she hears these lines the instant anybody says lilac, and said so while the drawing was being made. The page says that.

The recording, added 2026-09-09. The home page now carries a click-to-load embed of Eliot reading the poem — uploaded to YouTube by tim24frames, title T.S. Eliot reads: The Waste Land, confirmed via YouTube's oEmbed endpoint on 2026-09-09.

This one is not verified and is labelled as unverified on the page. Eliot recorded The Waste Land more than once, across the 1930s and 1940s. We have not established which reading this is, and we have no reason to think the uploading channel holds any right in it. The poem's text is public domain in the US; a mid-century sound recording of it generally is not, and the two are separate rights that this ledger should not be seen to conflate.

It is embedded rather than hosted — the bytes come from YouTube, and a takedown is YouTube's to honour — and the caption on the page says plainly that it is somebody else's copy of somebody else's tape. That is the honest description available, and it is deliberately not dressed up as provenance. If the upload disappears, the page degrades to a dead link rather than a false claim, which is the right way round.

The decision to carry it anyway is Ryan's and is recorded in DECISIONS.md.

Christina Rossetti — Promises like Pie-crust, and the colon at line 20 Link to this section

Quoted on: promises-like-pie-crust.html (the poem, entire).

Source: Christina Rossetti, Promises like Pie-crust, written 20 April 1861. First printed in New Poems by Christina Rossetti, Hitherto Unpublished or Uncollected, edited by William Michael Rossetti (New York and London: Macmillan, 1896), pages 130–131. Public domain. Read in two separately scanned copies of that edition:

Verified: 2026-09-08. The Princeton pages 130 and 131 were rendered as images and the type read, because the finding below is a single punctuation mark and a text extractor is not evidence about one. The Toronto copy was then read independently as corroboration: a different physical book, a different digitiser, a different OCR pipeline. The mark, the alternating indent and the date line agree in both. So the colon is the 1896 edition's, not one library's smudge or one scanner's artifact.

The finding: the first printing has a colon where the circulating text has a full stop.

line 20
1896, New Poems, p. 131I should fret to break the chain :
Poetry Archive, and every web copy checkedI should fret to break the chain .

Every other mark in the poem matches. The 1896 text has two full stops in twenty-four lines — line 16, closing the second stanza, and line 24, closing the poem. The circulating text has three. Eight lines end in colons in both.

The difference is grammatical, not cosmetic. A full stop closes "If you promised, you might grieve … I should fret to break the chain." into a finished sentence, and makes "Let us be the friends we were" a fresh proposal. The colon makes the stanza one movement in which the friendship is the consequence of what precedes the mark. And the line that acquired the extra full stop is the line about breaking the chain.

What is claimed, and what is not. We have not seen her manuscript. William Michael Rossetti printed from the seventeen notebooks she left and vouches in his preface for the accuracy of the dates in them; he says nothing about her punctuation, and the volume's notes section carries no entry on this poem at all (checked). So the colon is the earliest reading we can put our eyes on, not a certified authorial one, and nothing here claims anybody changed the mark deliberately — a full stop for a colon at the end of a quatrain is the most ordinary silent tidying there is. The claim on the sheet is only this: the earliest printing has a colon, the copies in circulation have a full stop, and quoting one while dating it to the other is a false statement about her. This is the Woolf edition trap arriving a second time, in reverse — see the entry above, where the tidy commas turned out to be the author's own earlier version.

Three things about the 1896 page that are the volume's typography and not hers, all normalised on the sheet and all said out loud on it:

  1. A space before every colon, semicolon and question mark. French spacing, set that way throughout the whole book — visible on the same two pages in Sister Maude and Better So. Closed up in our text.
  2. A drop cap. The poem opens PROMISE me no promises, after a large initial P, which is how the volume opens every poem. The word is Promise.
  3. A full-capitals title over the poem, again for every poem. The volume's own contents page (p. 411 of the scan) gives it as "Promises like Pie-crust" — lower-case like, lower-case c — and that is the form the sheet uses. Modern editions mostly print Promises Like Pie-Crust.

The alternating indent is reproduced, not invented. The 1896 setting indents every second line, and .qe-poem .l-in in queering.css is that fact and nothing else.

The proverb in the title has no owner here, on purpose. "Promises and pie-crust are made to be broken" was proverbial before Rossetti used it. The attribution in circulation runs to Jonathan Swift's Polite Conversation (1738) — which nobody here has read in a primary — and secondary sources record printed uses earlier still. The sheet therefore names no originator for the saying. Do not "improve" this by adding Swift's name off a quotation site.

Huysamen, Hatton and Kourti (2026) — the paper, and its participants Link to this section

Quoted on: promises-like-pie-crust.html — three passages of the authors' own analysis and six participant quotations.

Source: Monique Huysamen, Chris Hatton and Marianthi Kourti, "Embrace Difference, Challenge Normativity: Towards a Neuroqueer-informed Ethic for Supporting Autistic Adults' Intimate Lives," Feminism & Psychology, 2026. doi:10.1177/09593535261422510. Manchester Metropolitan University (Huysamen, Hatton) and the University of Birmingham (Kourti). © The Author(s) 2026. Read from the PDF held in the Stimpunks Knowledge System at inbox/huysamen-et-al-2026-embrace-difference-challenge-normativity-towards-a-neuroqueer-informed-ethic-for-supporting.pdf.

Verified: 2026-09-08, by extracting the article and reading every quoted sentence in its own paragraph, plus a page render for the one below. Not verified by searching our own library.

Participants are credited the way the paper credits them — pseudonym, age, gender, sexuality and focus group, e.g. PhotonPulse_he_him, 47, male, heterosexual, men's group. The group is part of the identification the study gives them and is not ours to drop.

Two elisions, both marked on the sheet. Two of the authors' sentences are quoted from their middles, where the original lead-in is a framing clause:

Raising those letters to capitals is the small tightening this file exists to catch: it makes a clause look like a sentence the authors wrote.

One character normalised, and it is worth knowing why. Indigo_Regent's quotation is printed in the article with a lower-case l in place of every I — "l can honestly say l wished l had followed", five times, and nowhere else in the twenty-three pages. It is in the printed article, not an extraction artifact: page 12 was rendered as an image and read to be sure. It is almost certainly how the participant typed into the forum, preserved verbatim by Sage. The sheet prints I. A run of stray ls on a web page reads as our typo and is spoken aloud as "el" by a screen reader, and no word is changed by fixing it. Recorded here so that nobody "corrects" the sheet back against the PDF and nobody quotes the ls as a finding about her.

The paper writes "autistic" in lower case throughout. House style is Autistic. The quotations keep their authors' usage, our prose uses ours, and the sheet's footer says so — the difference is visible on the page and an unexplained inconsistency looks like carelessness.

British spellings inside the quotations are theirs — realise, defining, coliving. Preserved.

Amanda Van Slyke — the definition of solo polyamory Link to this section

Quoted on: promises-like-pie-crust.html

Solo polyamory is the idea that people are autonomous beings who have different needs and wants, and alongside good communication and mutual respect between all partners, no one puts rules on each other because no one owns one another.

Source: Amanda Van Slyke, How Polyamory Helped Me Advocate For My Needs As A Disabled Person, Thought.is.

Verified: 2026-09-08, by fetching the page and reading the sentence in context. Wording matches exactly. The author was read off the page, not assumed from the site: this definition circulates widely without a name on it, and it has one.

No publication date is given on the page, so none is asserted on the sheet or here. If a date turns up, it goes in this entry — do not infer one from a sitemap or a feed.

Charles and George Darwin — Climbing Plants, quoted but no longer mounted Link to this section

Quoted on: promises-like-pie-crust.html — Fig. 13's printed caption, and Darwin's sentence about tendrils torn free. No image of either is on the sheet any more; see the note at the end of this entry.

Source: Charles Darwin, The Movements and Habits of Climbing Plants, second edition, revised (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1876) — the essay first appeared in the Journal of the Linnean Society vol. IX, 1865. Read from the Cornell University Library copy scanned for the Biodiversity Heritage Library: archive.org/details/cu31924024538922. The scan's own front matter states "There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text"; the work is public domain on its date regardless.

Quoted, both from printed page 165 (leaf n178), read off the page image and not the OCR:

A caught tendril of Bryonia dioica, spirally contracted in reversed directions.

…never occurs with uncaught tendrils; and when this appears to have occurred, it will be found that the tendril had originally seized some object and had afterwards been torn free.

The artist was George Darwin, and the credit came out of the preface. Darwin's own sentence, on the page after the title:

The illustrations were drawn by my son, George Darwin.

Keep this paragraph even though the figures are gone. These are woodcuts and carry no signature at all — nothing in the block, nothing under the caption, and nothing in the IA or BHL metadata, which names only Charles Darwin as creator. Credited off the metadata alone the drawings would have gone up as his father's. The credit existed in one sentence of prose four pages earlier. When the object has no corner to read, read the preface. If anybody ever mounts a figure from this book again, that is the sentence to cite.

The sheet's reading of Fig. 13 is flagged on the sheet as ours. Darwin is explaining a mechanical necessity — a tendril fixed at both ends cannot coil in one direction without unwinding itself. Reading the reversed spiral as a picture of two people keeping their own liberties is our move and the page says so in the same breath. His qualifier about tendrils torn free is quoted too, because leaving it out would make the figure mean something tidier than it does.

Removed from the sheet 2026-09-08, for looks and not for accuracy. Both woodcuts were mounted as plates and then taken off at Ryan's note that they were "a little underwhelming" in black and white on a colour sheet. The verification above stands and nothing about it was wrong; the images are gone from images/ and the quotations remain. See DECISIONS.md.

Annales Musei Botanici Lugduno-Batavi, volume 1 (1863) — three chromolithographs Link to this section

Used on: promises-like-pie-crust.html — three plates, chosen by Ryan from the Biodiversity Heritage Library's Flickr stream.

PlateSpecies, as printed on itSigned
Tab. IV — BHL p. 652124GONYSTYLUS MIQUELIANUS, T. ET B.van Aken et Bernecker, ad viv. del.
Tab. V — BHL p. 652159TECOMA CERAMENSIS T. & B.A. Bernecker. del.
Tab. IX — BHL p. 652299WORMIA SUBSESSILIS MIQ.Th. Rocke, del.

Source: Annales Musei Botanici Lugduno-Batavi, volume 1 (Amsterdam: Apud C. G. van der Post, 1863). All three chromolithographed by Emrik & Binger of Haarlem, whose imprint is printed in the lower right of each plate. Public domain — so marked by BHL on all three, and settled by the date. Scanned from the Missouri Botanical Garden, Peter H. Raven Library copy; also at archive.org/details/mobot31753002764873.

Verified: 2026-09-08. Species names, Tab numbers, draughtsman signatures and the lithographer's imprint were each read off the plate at full scan resolution — the signatures are small and were cropped and enlarged to be sure of them. Th. Rocke in particular is set tight and small and was checked twice.

The volume was pinned by matching a leaf, not by trusting a caption. The Flickr descriptions give only the serial title, which ran to four volumes between 1863 and 1869 with the plate numbering restarting each time — so "Tab. IV" alone identifies nothing. The Flickr photo titles (n145, n180, n320) are Internet Archive leaf numbers, so leaf n145 was fetched from each of the four volumes in turn and compared: only volume 1's is the Gonystylus plate.

A metadata error, found the same way as the last one. BHL's Flickr tags on Tab. IV carry taxonomy:binomial=Gonystylus macrophyllus. The plate itself says GONYSTYLUS MIQUELIANUS, T. ET B., and that is what the sheet cites. The two names may well be synonyms in current taxonomy — that is a question for a botanist and not for us — but the object's own printed name is the object's own printed name. This is the third time a digitiser's metadata has disagreed with the corner of the plate on this site: see the Fitch note under Plate 511 above, and the Darwin woodcuts, where the metadata named the wrong Darwin.

Standing note, now with three cases behind it: read the corner. Every time.

M. C. Cooke — Illustrations of British Fungi, plate 85 Link to this section

Used on: promises-like-pie-crust.html

A hand-coloured plate on grey ground carrying two species: group A is Agaricus (Lepiota) sistratus, Fries, "in Gardens"; group B is Agaricus (Lepiota) mesomorphus, Bull., "in woods. New Forest." Both captions are printed on the plate and are transcribed from it.

Source: Mordecai Cubitt Cooke, Illustrations of British Fungi (Hymenomycetes), to serve as an atlas to the "Handbook of British Fungi", volume 1 (London: Williams and Norgate, 1881–91), plate 85. Read from the University of Toronto copy scanned for the Biodiversity Heritage Library: archive.org/details/illustrationsofb01cookuoft, leaf n112. Public domain — the Internet Archive record carries possible-copyright-status: NOT_IN_COPYRIGHT, and the date settles it anyway.

The artist was read off the corner, and then confirmed from the preface. The plate is signed M.C.C. in the lower left. The initials were checked at full scan resolution rather than guessed from a thumbnail. Cooke's own preface, on printed page 3 of the same volume, explains the convention:

Their initials are attached to the copies of their drawings.

— written of the contributors he thanks by name and initial (M.J.B., R.E.B., C.E.B., C.B., H.G.B., T.H., G.M., W.P., C.B.P., W.G.S. and Rev. John Stevenson). Other plates in the volume are signed with those initials instead, and plate 85's are Cooke's own. So the volume is a multi-artist book in which the plate tells you who drew it, and "Cooke, 1881" is not automatically the right credit for any given plate in it. Check the corner of each one.

Verified: 2026-09-08, from the scan of the plate itself and of the preface page.

Helen Edgar — Wyrd, Weird, and the Invention of Normal, and a byline that is not a transcript Link to this section

Quoted on: invention-of-normal.html

Three sentences are quoted verbatim from Helen's More Realms essay:

In Old English, wyrd meant fate, but not necessarily the fixed, predetermined fate the word often suggests today.

Somewhere along the way, worth got redefined as fitting in, while being different stopped being something we valued at all.

I think this is what wyrd actually means, human worth that was never about being static, never about being plotted somewhere along someone else's bell curve, but about always moving, always still taking shape.

Source: Helen Edgar, Wyrd, Weird, and the Invention of Normal, More Realms, July 2026.

Verified: 2026-09-08, by fetching the live page and reading each sentence in place. The SKS mirror at site/morerealms-com/posts/becoming-weird-wyrd-normality.md was the finding step and is not the authority; the live page is.

The byline was wrong, it shipped, and Helen corrected it. 2026-09-08.

The sheet first went out with a Written by — Helen Edgar row, on Ryan's instruction, because the argument, the sources, and the reading list are all hers. The draft flagged the risk at the time — a byline plus unmarked new prose is the same failure as a tightened quotation, somebody's name on words that are not theirs — and shipped anyway, with a caveat row instead of a fix.

Helen read it and declined:

do you think we should have these as Sourced from Helen Written by Ryan …? I can't take any credit beyond you reading my weird stuff

She is right, and the site had already written the answer down before the sheet was made. design.html defines the label as carrying "the date of the reading, and who read it," and says "a specimen is collected, not written." Queering Earth does not have bylines; it has Maker and Read by, on separate rows. The Woolf and Rossetti sheets use that grammar. This one reached for Written by and broke it.

Corrected to: Specimen — Helen's essay. Maker — Helen Edgar. Read by — Ryan Boren. The This text row now reads the argument is hers; the sentences around her quotations are ours, and this label is where we say so. Nothing about the quotations themselves changed; they were always marked and linked.

The general rule, now recorded in DECISIONS.md: a living person gets a Maker row for what they made and a Read by row for what they read, and never a Written by row for prose they did not write. A caveat row underneath a wrong byline is not a fix. It is the wrong byline with a footnote, which is exactly the shape of every other failure in this file.

Alby Stone — Wyrd, and the worth in the word Link to this section

Quoted on: invention-of-normal.html

Old English wyrd combines all the qualities found in the names of the three nornir: it means 'worth'; 'death'; and that which will happen or come to be.

and

something much more flexible and worthwhile than the rigid, impersonal and implacable force that fate is commonly expected to be

Source: Alby Stone, Wyrd: Fate and Destiny in North European Paganism, corrected edition (Heart of Albion Press, 2022; first published 1989), pp. 37 and 45.

Verified: 2026-09-08, against the extracted text of the PDF held in the SKS library (raw/WYRD-FATE-AND-DESTINY-IN-NORTH-EUROPEAN-PAGANISM.pdf), reading the surrounding pages rather than the search snippet. Page numbers in that book sit at the foot of the page, not the head — the extracted stream prints 36 before the text of page 37, and reading the marker as a header puts every citation one page early.

Karen Bek-Pedersen (2022) — Holinshed, the First Folio, and Theobald Link to this section

Quoted on: invention-of-normal.html, in the paste-up wall

Three quotations reach the sheet through Bek-Pedersen's article rather than from the originals: Holinshed's "goddesses of destinie… nymphs or feiries" (Holinshed 1808: 269), the First Folio's "The weyward Sisters, hand in hand, / Posters of the Sea and Land" (Furness Variorum), and Theobald's gloss on wayward (Theobald 1733: 392). Each caption on the sheet says so, with her page number, because a secondary source that says it is quoting is still a secondary source and the reader is owed the chain.

Her own conclusion is quoted directly:

Theobald may in one sense revert the picture back to the Scottish tradition of the 'weird sisters' by substituting 'weyward' with 'weird', but in doing so he bypasses Shakespeare altogether.

Source: Karen Bek-Pedersen, "Macbeth and 'the Weird Sisters' – on Fates and Witches", Scottish Studies 39 (2022), 58–80, at pp. 64, 73, 76.

Verified: 2026-09-08, from the PDF in the SKS inbox, reading the full article.

The finding that cuts against us, kept on the page. Bek-Pedersen argues that Shakespeare wrote weyward deliberately, that his three women are witches rather than Fates, and that Theobald's 1733 emendation "bypasses Shakespeare altogether." That is inconvenient for a reclamation of the Weird Sisters, and the sheet says so twice — once in the section and once in What this sheet will not tidy — rather than quoting her transcriptions and dropping her argument. Quoting a scholar's evidence while suppressing her conclusion is the worst version of the paraphrase-as-quotation failure, because every individual quotation is exact.

Mark Fisher — the weird as that which does not belong Link to this section

Quoted on: invention-of-normal.html

…the weird is that which does not belong. The weird brings to the familiar something which ordinarily lies beyond it, and which cannot be reconciled with the "homely" (even as its negation).

and, from a later paragraph of the same introduction:

is often a sign that we are in the presence of the new. The weird here is a signal that the concepts and frameworks which we have previously employed are now obsolete.

Source: Mark Fisher, The Weird and the Eerie (Repeater Books, 2016), introduction.

Verified: 2026-09-08, from the epub held in the SKS inbox.

No page number, on purpose. The circulating citation for the first sentence is "p. 8", and the epub has no pagination to confirm it against. The sheet cites the introduction and says the ebook carries no page numbers, rather than repeating a page it cannot see. A page number copied from somebody else's citation is an unverified claim wearing a footnote.

Tuck and Yang (2014) — refusal, and a transposition that is ours Link to this section

Quoted on: invention-of-normal.html

Refusal is not just a "no," but a redirection to ideas otherwise unacknowledged or unquestioned.

(p. 239) and

refusal is not a prohibition but a generative form

(p. 241).

Source: Eve Tuck and K. Wayne Yang, "R-Words: Refusing Research", in Django Paris and Maisha T. Winn (eds), Humanizing Research: Decolonizing Qualitative Inquiry with Youth and Communities (Sage, 2014), 223–248. They are explicating Audra Simpson, "On Ethnographic Refusal: Indigeneity, 'Voice' and Colonial Citizenship", Junctures 9 (2007), 67–80, and the sheet credits her too.

Verified: 2026-09-08, from the PDF in the SKS inbox. Page numbers were pinned by splitting the extracted text on form feeds and reading the running head of each page, not by guessing from the position of a page number in the text stream.

The object was changed, so the sheet says whose move that is. Tuck and Yang are writing about settler colonialism, Indigenous sovereignty, and the research apparatus. Applying refusal to masking and compliance culture is our extension, and the sheet states it in a bolded sentence — The transposition here is ours, and it needs saying plainly — instead of letting their authority quietly cover our argument. Same discipline as the Walker entry at the top of this file: credit the concept, quote the original exactly, and own the move.

Elliot Wassell (2026) — Experiences of autistic joy, and a citation that was wrong Link to this section

Quoted on: invention-of-normal.html

…the key barrier to joyful experience is not autism itself but other people's lack of acceptance of authentic autistic behaviours such as stimming and pursuit of special interests.

(abstract) and, from Participant 28:

No matter how 'weird', 'age inappropriate', or 'useless' our passions might seem to them, for us, this is what makes life worth living.

(p. 249).

Source: Elliot Wassell, "Experiences of autistic joy", Disability & Society 41:1 (2026), 236–261. Open access, CC BY.

Verified: 2026-09-08, from the PDF in the SKS inbox.

The citation we were handed was wrong and is corrected here. The brief for the sheet gave it as "Wassell, E. (2025). Disability & Society, 41(3), 1–26." The article's own first page gives volume 41, issue 1, pages 236–261, dated 2026 — 2025 is the online-first date. Both the issue number and the page range were wrong, and "1–26" is the give-away of a citation taken from an online-first PDF before pagination. Anywhere else this citation appears in Stimpunks material, it needs the same correction.

Demographics quoted on the sheet come from the same paper: 86 participants, 86% female, 10% non-binary, 4% male; 67% report often experiencing joy; 94% actively enjoy aspects of being Autistic.

Ingram and Jacobsen (2025) — queercrip joy Link to this section

Quoted on: invention-of-normal.html

Queercrip joy is more than finding new happy objects—it is refusing to collapse 'positive' affects and 'negative' affects into a mutually exclusive binary.

Source: Megan Ingram and Kai Jacobsen, "Both because of and in spite of: Towards the reclamation of queercrip joy", Sexualities 28:3 (2025), 795–810, at p. 804.

Verified: 2026-09-08, from the PDF in the SKS inbox; the page was pinned from the running head of the page the sentence sits on.

Robert Chapman (2023) — Empire of Normality, and Quetelet at one remove Link to this section

Quoted on: invention-of-normal.html

Chapman's own sentence:

The error curve developed to predict the course of stars now applied to human normativity, and to be abnormal was to be a mistake of nature.

and his definition of the Empire of Normality as "an apparatus of material relations, social practices, scientific research programmes, bureaucratic mechanisms, economic compulsions, and administrative procedures".

Source: Robert Chapman, Empire of Normality: Neurodiversity and Capitalism (Pluto Press, 2023), introduction and chapter 2, "The invention of normality".

Verified: 2026-09-08, from the epub held in the SKS inbox. No page numbers: the epub has none, and the sheet says so rather than inventing them.

Quetelet is quoted at one remove, and the ellipses are structural. The sheet mounts:

If the average man were completely determined… we might consider him as the type of perfection; and everything differing from his proportions or condition, would constitute… a monstrosity.

Chapman prints that sentence in three pieces, interrupted by "he wrote" and "he went on". The two ellipses mark exactly those interruptions and nothing else, and the caption on the sheet says so, because an unexplained ellipsis inside a quotation of a nineteenth-century statistician is the shape a trimmed quotation takes.

Ombre Tarragnat — ethodiversity Link to this section

Quoted on: invention-of-normal.html

Ethodiversity, short for ethological diversity, refers to the intra- and inter-specific variabilities and differences in behavioural or existential styles in (human and nonhuman) animals.

and

The term 'ethodiversity' parallels 'biodiversity' and 'neurodiversity'.

Source: Ombre Tarragnat, What is ethodiversity?, 25 February 2025.

Verified: 2026-09-08, against Tarragnat's own site. The Stimpunks glossary entry was the finding step; the primary is the authority.

Public-domain texts on the Wyrd sheet Link to this section

Quoted on: invention-of-normal.html

Verified: 2026-09-08.

Susan Schoon Eberly (1988) — changelings, described and not quoted Link to this section

Cited on: invention-of-normal.html

Source: Susan Schoon Eberly, "Fairies and the Folklore of Disability: Changelings, Hybrids and the Solitary Fairy", Folklore 99:1 (1988), 58–77.

Verified: 2026-09-08 — bibliographic details only. The full text is paywalled and was not read here, so the sheet describes her thesis and quotes nothing. If a future session gets the article, a quotation may be added; until then the absence of quotation marks is the honest signal.

The Bridget Cleary paragraph on the same sheet is a separate claim and was checked separately: died 15 March 1895 at Ballyvadlea, County Tipperary; her husband Michael Cleary maintained she was a changeling; nine people were charged; he was convicted of manslaughter. The earlier draft said "burned to death by her own husband and relatives" and named no verdict — the relatives' role and the cause of death are both contested in the record, and the sentence was narrowed to what is not.

The Tempest on the Miranda sheet, and the speech Theobald moved Link to this section

Quoted on: the-tempest.html

Six passages, all from the play: Miranda's "If by your art" / "O, I have suffered" (I.ii), Prospero's "Be collected. / No more amazement." (I.ii), "Abhorred slave" (I.ii), Caliban's "I had peopled else / This isle with Calibans" (I.ii), Prospero's virgin-knot warning (IV.i), Miranda's proposal "I am your wife, if you will marry me" (III.i), and "O, wonder! … O brave new world" with Prospero's "'Tis new to thee" (V.i).

Source: cited on the sheet as The Tempest (V. M. Vaughan & A. T. Vaughan, eds), Arden Shakespeare, 2004; original work 1611.

Verified: 2026-09-08, against the Folger Shakespeare Library's text of I.ii. Speaker prefixes, wording and act/scene attributions all match. The Folger prints "Abhorrèd slave" with a grave accent to mark the metre; the sheet prints "Abhorred", which is the Folio spelling and the one the draft used.

The editorial claim is the load-bearing one on this sheet, and it is confirmed twice. The sheet's central device strikes out PROSPERO and writes Miranda over it, so the claim "the Folio gives this speech to Miranda and Theobald moved it" is doing more work than any single quotation. Both halves check out independently:

One thing that note does not say is the date. It identifies Theobald by his lifespan and gives no year for the change. The sheet dates it 1733, which is the date of Theobald's Works of William Shakespeare — already cited on invention-of-normal.html, volume 5, for his substitution of weird for weyward in Macbeth. Same editor, same edition, two sheets. The 1733 date is therefore the edition's, not a claim found in the Navigators note, and anybody re-checking this should check it against Theobald's edition rather than against that note.

Butler is quoted, not paraphrased. "a stylized repetition of acts" is Butler's phrase from Gender Trouble (Routledge, 1990) and sits in quotation marks on the sheet. The sentence around it — gender as "a performative accomplishment that both the audience and the performer come to believe in the doing of it" — is ours, and is unquoted for that reason. Ahmed, Kafer, Slights, Thompson and Kathman are all described rather than quoted on this sheet; none of their sentences appears in quotation marks, and no wording is attributed to them.

"She has never seen a woman other than her own reflection, by her own account." That hedge is doing real work and must not be removed. Miranda says in III.i that she does not know one of her own sex and remembers "no woman's face … Save, from my glass, mine own" — but in I.ii she half-remembers "four or five women once that tended me", which is the claim this repo already corrected once in the Waterhouse caption on invention-of-normal.html (see the entry below). The two speeches contradict each other, and the sheet is citing the later one as hers rather than asserting it as fact. An editor tidying "by her own account" out of that sentence would re-commit the error the register apologises for.

Two citations that arrived wrong in the Miranda draft Link to this section

Corrected on: the-tempest.html, before it shipped.

The sheet's layout and reference list came from Helen Edgar's own Claude session and were adopted as sent. Two entries did not survive checking, and one was an attribution error rather than a typo.

Verified: 2026-09-08. Slights (SEL 41:2, 357–79) and the Thompson page range were checked at the same time and were correct as sent.

Left as sent, and flagged rather than fixed: Chapman's Empire of Normality is in the reference list and is not cited anywhere in the sheet's text. It is not an error — the argument it supports is carried by invention-of-normal.html, which quotes Chapman twice — but it is an entry with nothing pointing at it. Removing it would be an edit to Helen's list rather than a correction to it, so it stays and this note exists instead.

Waterhouse's Miranda mounted a second time Link to this section

Mounted on: the-tempest.html — the same file as on invention-of-normal.html.

Provenance, public-domain reasoning, medium, dimensions and alt text are all in the "Two paintings on the Wyrd sheet" entry below and are not restated here. Nothing about the image or its verification changed; it is the same scan, at the same address, with the same alt text, which was written from looking at the picture.

"Chosen by Helen Edgar" is not repeated on this sheet, and that is deliberate. She picked the plate for the Wyrd sheet, where the credit belongs and where it stays. Repeating it on a second sheet would extend a named contribution to a decision she did not make: mounting it here was ours.

What the draft asked for instead. It hot-linked the Wikimedia file with a JavaScript onerror fallback reading "Plate to be inserted … Reference held at Sotheby's / private collection. Source a high-resolution scan before publishing — see note to Helen." The scan had already been sourced and verified that morning for Sheet No. 4, so the sheet mounts the local file and the placeholder is gone.

One new claim in the caption, checked. The draft's caption calls it "forty-one years after his first, gentler Miranda of 1875." Waterhouse did exhibit a Miranda in 1875 — his second Royal Academy exhibit — and 1916 − 1875 = 41. He died in 1917, so "the year before Waterhouse's death" holds. Verified 2026-09-08 against the Wikipedia article on the painting). A caption is a claim like any other and gets checked like one — the same sentence this ledger already carries one entry down.

Two paintings on the Wyrd sheet, chosen by Helen Edgar Link to this section

Mounted on: invention-of-normal.html

Verified: 2026-09-08. Artist dates, titles, dates, media, dimensions and collection read off the Commons file pages; the Hughes medium and dimensions cross-checked against the Wikipedia article on the painting, because the Commons record says only "Painting" and a caption that says watercolour has to be able to point at something.

Public domain, and the reason is the artist, not the scan. Hughes died in 1914 and Waterhouse in 1917, so both works are out of copyright everywhere the term is life plus 100 or fewer, and both were published before 1 January 1931. The photographs come from third parties — a Birmingham Museums image for the Hughes, a Sotheby's catalogue image for the Waterhouse — and a faithful photographic reproduction of a flat public-domain work attracts no new copyright, which is the same basis on which the Biodiversity Heritage Library plates on this site are used. The captions credit the digitiser and say the work is public domain; they do not claim the scan is ours.

"Chosen by Helen Edgar" is in both captions and belongs there. She picked them, and on this site that is a named contribution — see the byline entry above for how nearly the record lost track of what she actually did.

Two claims in the Waterhouse caption were checked against the play, not against the painting. The caption quotes Miranda's "the third man that e'er I saw" (The Tempest I.ii, confirmed against the Project Gutenberg text) and places the brave-new-world line "in the last act" (V.i). An earlier draft said she had never seen anybody but her father and Caliban — wrong, she also half-remembers "four or five women once that tended me" — and dated the later speech "four scenes later", which is four acts. A caption is a claim like any other and gets checked like one.

Alt text was written from looking at the images, not from the Commons description, which is why it describes the fallen unlit lantern and the pink flowers in the rocks. Descriptions inherited from a catalogue record describe the catalogue record.

Pamela Demory — "to queer, then, may be to adapt", and the same sentence adapted by its own author Link to this section

Quoted on: index.html, in To queer is to adapt and The sentence adapts itself. Four quotations from Demory, in two places, plus one phrase she is herself quoting.

1. The slash (2019), quoted in full:

To adapt is to modify, to evolve, to transform, to repeat, imitate, parody, make new. To queer something is to make it strange or odd, but also to turn or transform it. To queer, then, may be to adapt; to adapt is to queer.

2 and 3. Two phrases from the same page, quoted inline: "suffer from the stereotype of being secondary, somehow less authentic" (page 1), and "If we think of queer as a verb, as a doing rather than a being, then to queer something is to deconstruct it, to demonstrate the instability of all those apparently obvious oppositions" (page 3). The three oppositions the page then names — male/female, homosexuality/heterosexuality, normal/deviant — are given on our page as a list in our own sentence, not inside the quotation marks.

Source: Pamela Demory, "Queer/Adaptation: An Introduction", chapter 1, pages 1–14, in Queer/Adaptation: A Collection of Critical Essays, ed. Pamela Demory, Palgrave Studies in Adaptation and Visual Culture, Palgrave Macmillan, 2019. DOI 10.1007/978-3-030-05306-2_1.

Verified: 2026-09-08, by extracting the full chapter text from the PDF held in the Stimpunks Knowledge System at inbox/Queer_Adaptation_An_Introduction.pdf and reading the sentences in place. All three are exact, including the unpunctuated tail of the first ("to repeat, imitate, parody, make new" — no to before the last three verbs, which is Demory's own acceleration and not a transcription slip). Page numbers read off the running heads in the scan.

4. The same sentence, five years later:

As argued elsewhere, queer and adaptation are parallel terms, both shaping the ways that we approach or reflect on given texts. In other words, 'To adapt is to modify … To queer something is to make it strange or odd … or transform it. To queer, then, may be to adapt' (Demory 2019).

Source: Pamela Demory, "Queering Emily Dickinson for the Millennial Age", chapter 10 of Adapting Television and Literature, ed. Blythe Worthy and Paul Sheehan, Palgrave Studies in Adaptation and Visual Culture, Palgrave Macmillan, 2024. DOI 10.1007/978-3-031-50832-5_10. The chapter reads Apple TV+'s Dickinson (2019–2021, created by Alena Smith).

Verified in two halves, 2026-09-08, and the second half is not the primary.

What to do about that. Nothing, unless the chapter becomes readable. It is recorded here rather than quietly shipped because the difference between "read in the primary" and "transcribed by a person we trust" is exactly what this file exists to keep visible. If a future session gets access to the 2024 chapter, read that first sentence and either confirm it here or fix the page.

Why this pair is on the front page at all. The 2024 quotation is a demonstration of the 2019 one. Demory adapts her own sentence — trims it to fit a new argument, keeps her name on it, and the sentence survives as something no longer identical to itself. That is the exact manoeuvre this file was written to police in other people's hands, and the thing that makes it legitimate rather than a misquotation is visible in the text: the ellipses. The front page says so.

One phrase quoted at one remove, and labelled as such. The page also carries "repetition, but repetition without replication", which is Linda Hutcheon's definition of adaptation (A Theory of Adaptation, page 7) as quoted by Demory on page 3 of the 2019 introduction. Hutcheon's own book has not been read here. The front page names both people and says the phrase is quoted in Demory's introduction, which is the honest form: the citation on the page claims only what was actually verified, which is that Demory quotes Hutcheon saying it.

Emily Dickinson — Wild nights – Wild nights!, the 1891 tidy, and two scans that were not two witnesses Link to this section

Quoted on: wild-nights.html (the poem, entire, and seven lines of it again in a comparison table).

The specimen. Wild nights – Wild nights! — Fr269, J249 — written about late 1861 and sewn into Fascicle 11. The manuscript is one leaf in ink at Houghton Library, Harvard University: MS Am 1118.3 (38b), in Poems: Packet VIII, Fascicle 11, catalogued by the Emily Dickinson Archive as F269A. The poem is public domain; the photograph of the leaf is not, and has its own entry below.

The text on the sheet is R. W. Franklin's reading of that leaf, as published in the Emily Dickinson Archive and printed identically by the Poetry Foundation from his Reading Edition (Belknap Press, 1999). The sheet names the edition in the label rather than claiming the manuscript, and that is deliberate — see the last section of this entry.

Verified: 2026-09-08.

The finding: the first printing tidied nine dashes down to one.

as Franklin reads the leaf1891, Second Series, p. 97
line 1Wild nights – Wild nights!WILD nights ! Wild nights !
line 5Futile – the winds –Futile the winds
line 6To a Heart in port –To a heart in port, —
line 7Done with the Compass –Done with the compass,
line 8Done with the Chart!Done with the chart.
line 10Ah – the Sea!Ah ! the sea !
lines 11–12Might I but moor – tonight – / In thee!Might I but moor / To-night in thee !

Nine dashes go in and one comes out — the em dash closing line 6, and it has acquired a comma in front of it. Four of her capitals are lowered: Heart, Compass, Chart, Sea. Eden keeps its capital because Eden is a proper noun in anybody's grammar and the other four were only proper nouns in hers. Three exclamation marks and three commas are added; a full stop replaces the exclamation at the end of stanza 2. Counting the marks rather than the changes: her five exclamation points become seven.

Three things on the 1891 page that are the volume's typography and not hers, all normalised on the sheet and all said out loud on it:

  1. A two-line drop cap. The poem opens WILD nights ! after a large initial W, which is how the volume opens every poem. The word is Wild.
  2. The same initial is why line 2 sits inset. Were I with thee, is set beside the drop cap, not indented by an editor. Do not "restore" that indent as an editorial choice — it is a consequence of the W.
  3. A space before every exclamation mark, all through the book — the same French spacing as the 1896 Rossetti volume two entries up. House style of the volume, not her pointing.

The lineation is not a tidy, and the sheet says so. Dickinson wrote Might I but moor – and ran out of leaf, so Tonight – went on the line below. Franklin records that division in his textual notes (Division / 11 moor - |) and reads through it. Todd and Higginson set what was in front of them. One editor reproduced the poem and the other reproduced the leaf, and both are defensible. Do not "fix" the sheet by calling 1891 wrong about line 11.

The circulating text, and a word missing from it. The Academy of American Poets, read on 2026-09-08 out of the live DOM rather than out of a summary, prints a composite: the dashes restored, heart / compass / chart / sea still lower case from 1891, Ah, the sea! with a comma that is in neither, Wild Nights capitalized where neither the leaf nor 1891 capitalizes it, and line 11 as Might I moor – Tonight –.

line 11
Franklin, and the leafMight I but moor – tonight –
poets.org, 2026-09-08Might I moor – Tonight –

The word but is gone, and it is the hinge of the line: might I but moor is a plea with a limit built into it, might I moor is a request for permission to dock. The page names no edition, no editor and no date, and says only "This poem is in the public domain," which is true of the poem and tells a reader nothing about the text. This is the Woolf edition trap and the Rossetti colon arriving a third time. Name the printing, or do not quote.

And the methodological finding, which matters more than any of the above. Page 97 was read in three scanned copies. The first two — the Internet Archive items poemsbyemilyd00dickrich (via the Commons DjVu.djvu), which is derived from it) and poemssecondserie00dickrich — agree with each other and are wrong. A broken piece of type makes line 11 read mocr instead of moor, identically in both, and it is unambiguous at native resolution. Both are digitised from University of California Libraries holdings. The University of Toronto copy has the word intact.

Two scans that agree are not two witnesses if they came out of one library. The Rossetti entry above says "two separately scanned copies" and it meant two libraries; that was luck of phrasing rather than precision, and this sheet nearly published a broken letter as a variant reading before the third copy was pulled. The rule, restated so the next session cannot miss it: corroboration means a different physical copy from a different holding institution digitised by a different pipeline. Two of those three is not enough. mocr is named on the sheet as a press defect and nowhere claimed as a reading.

What is not claimed. We read the facsimile and we are not setting our own readings of her marks against Franklin's. What is on the leaf is a great many short strokes of varying length and angle, some of which are dashes, some of which are exclamation points and some of which are the tail of the letter before them; the sheet says this in as many words. The dashes are set as spaced en dashes, which is a rendering convention and is disclosed in the poem's caption. If a future session wants to make a claim about a particular mark on this leaf, it needs Franklin's variorum apparatus and Johnson's, not an afternoon with the JPEG.

T. W. Higginson to Mabel Loomis Todd, 21 April 1891 — the letter about this poem Link to this section

Quoted on: wild-nights.html, two paragraphs of the letter.

Let us alter as little as possible, now that the public ear is opened.

One poem only I dread a little to print—that wonderful "Wild Nights,"—lest the malignant read into it more than that virgin recluse ever dreamed of putting there. Has Miss Lavinia any shrinking about it? You will understand & pardon my solicitude. Yet what a loss to omit it! Indeed it is not to be omitted.

Source: Thomas Wentworth Higginson to Mabel Loomis Todd, headed 25 Buckingham St. / Cambridge, Mass. / Apr. 21, 1891, printed in Millicent Todd Bingham, Ancestors' Brocades: The Literary Debut of Emily Dickinson (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1945), page 127.

Verified: 2026-09-08, by rendering page 127 of the scan held at archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.29377 as an image and reading the type, not from the OCR — the OCR of that page mangles the ampersand to &: and the footnote marker to ®, which is exactly the kind of noise that turns into a false quotation. The salutation is small-capped DEAR FRIEND; the em dashes are closed up as printed and the sheet says so, because house style spaces them and a quotation keeps its own pointing.

Bingham's own footnote corroborates the page. Her note 5 on that sentence reads Poems, Second Series, p. 97 — the same page we read in three copies for the entry above, arrived at independently.

Two things the sheet says about this letter, and one it does not. It says Higginson knew exactly what was in the poem — the apparatus of denial and the decision to publish are in the same paragraph — and it says he wrote let us alter as little as possible two lines before the poem reached the press with eight of its nine dashes gone. It does not say Higginson made those changes. Nothing read here establishes whether the pointing on page 97 is his, Todd's, or the compositor's, and the sheet leaves that open rather than pinning it on the man whose letter we happen to have.

Miss Lavinia is Lavinia Dickinson, the poet's sister, identified in the caption.

The manuscript image — Houghton Library, and the first plate here that is not public domain Link to this section

Mounted on: wild-nights.html.

File: images/dickinson-1861-wild-nights-houghton-ms-am-1118-3-38b.jpg, 1400×2159.

Credit, in the form the archive requires: Houghton Library, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA — Poems: Packet VIII, Fascicle 11. Includes 20 poems, written in ink, ca. 1861, MS Am 1118.3 (38b). Emily Dickinson Archive, <https://www.edickinson.org>.

Licence: CC BY-NC-ND 3.0. The archive's Copyright & Terms of Use page, read 2026-09-08, states that images of manuscripts, attribution information and transcriptions on the site are governed by that licence, that no permission is needed for "personal research, in-class teaching purposes, school projects and assignments, blog posts, or other non-commercial uses", and that the material "must be used with accompanying credit line to the owning institution".

How the three licence conditions are met, so that a later session does not undo one of them by accident:

This is the first thing mounted on this site that is not in the public domain, and the sheet says so in What this sheet will not tidy. The poem is public domain; the photograph is offered under a licence, and we take the archive at its word rather than arguing about whether a photograph of a flat public-domain manuscript can carry a copyright of its own. That is a decision about how this site behaves rather than a legal opinion, and it is recorded in DECISIONS.md.

One thing we did not do. EDA also asks that reuse of "edited texts, as presented in the Johnson or Franklin volumes" be taken up with Harvard University Press. The sheet quotes a twelve-line public-domain poem in a critical reading, names the edition at every use, and links the archive — the same footing as the Arden text on the Miranda sheet. The transcription is credited to Franklin and never presented as ours.

The terms quoted on the Dickinson sheet, and who coined each one Link to this section

Quoted on: wild-nights.html. Seven sources, three of them at one remove and all three labelled as such on the sheet itself. Verified: 2026-09-08. Every DOI below was resolved through DOI content negotiation and the title, authors, journal, volume, issue, pages and year read off the registered record — the first draft of this sheet carried three citations written from memory and two of them were wrong, which is the reason this paragraph exists.

termcredited toread wherechecked
co-regulationJanae Elisabeth, writing as Trauma Geek, The Neuroscience of Communitythe Stimpunks co-regulation entry, which quotes itURL taken from the glossary's own link, not typed
co-regulation as system propertyLori Hogenkamp, Dhwani Sanghavi and Heini Natri, Toward an Emergent Paradigm for Neurodiversity and Healththe same glossary entry10.1177/25739581261433443 — Autism in Adulthood, 24 March 2026
safety as sensory, attentional, relational and politicalHelen Edgar, Expanding the Mycelial Network of Care, More Realmsher own pageread in place
belongingthe Stimpunks glossary itself — belongingtheresee note below
stimmingKapp, Steward, Crane, Elliott, Elphick, Pellicano and Russellthe Stimpunks stimming entry10.1177/1362361319829628 — Autism 23:7 (2019), 1782–1792
bodymindMargaret Price, The Bodymind Problem and the Possibilities of Pain — quoted through Nick Walkerthe Stimpunks bodymind entryPrice: Hypatia 30:1 (2015), 268–284. Walker: 10.1089/aut.2020.29014.njw, Autism in Adulthood 3:1 (2021), 5–10, interviewed by Dora M. Raymaker
glimmersDeb Dana — quoted through Helen EdgarGlimmers: Autistic Joy and Monotropism, Autistic RealmsDana's The Polyvagal Theory in Therapy (W. W. Norton, 2018) confirmed bibliographically, not read
limerenceDorothy Tennov, Love and Limerence (Stein and Day, 1979)Psychology Today, via the Stimpunks limerence entryTennov's book confirmed bibliographically, not read

Three citation errors caught before the sheet shipped, all of them written from memory into the first draft and all of them the shape this file exists to catch:

  1. A fabricated DOI for the Hogenkamp paper — 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1546642, a plausible Frontiers identifier for a paper that is in Autism in Adulthood. A DOI invented to look right is the worst thing on this list, because it resolves to somebody else's work.
  2. The Walker interview as aut.2021.29014.njw. The registered DOI is aut.2020.29014.njw — the article is 2021 and the identifier is 2020, which is exactly the trap.
  3. A wrong Medium slug for the Trauma Geek piece. The right one is the glossary's own link and it was there to be copied all along.

Standing rule, which is the Miranda lesson in a new place: a DOI, a slug, a volume number and a page range are claims like any other. Resolve them, or take them verbatim from the page you actually read. Never type one from memory.

Why belonging is credited to the glossary and not to a person. The passage quoted — "Belonging means more than being included…" — sits in the Stimpunks glossary entry between a webinar link and a quotation from Hari Srinivasan (2026), and carries no byline of its own within the entry. Rather than attach it to whichever neighbour is nearest, the sheet credits the glossary and says in the caption that it is doing so. If a future session establishes an author for that paragraph, credit the person and fix the caption.

Two extensions on the sheet that are ours, and are labelled ours. Both are in What this sheet will not tidy:

Ryan Boren's reply in verse — our own words, and the punctuation we added Link to this section

On: wild-nights.html, thirty-two lines in two .qe-verse blocks.

The verse is Ryan Boren's, written for a person rather than for a readership, and mounted at his request. His instruction was explicit: "Don't revise my writing above except to give the verse proper poetic formatting/punctuation."

What was changed, in full, because an unmarked edit of our own text is the same failure as an unmarked edit of somebody else's — the rule the coming-to-terms label already sets:

The sheet's label carries the row Reply in verse — Ryan Boren. Punctuation set for print; the words and the line breaks are his. That row is the disclosure and it is not decorative. If the verse is ever edited further, the row and this entry both need changing.

The links inside the verse are ours, not his prosody. co-regulation, Stimmy, glimmers, Somatic, limerence and assemblage are anchored to the glossary and to Helen's page. They add no words and change no line.

Sarah Prager (2020) — the set of four, and the sentence we quote of hers Link to this section

Quoted on: flower-codes.html, index.html

The whole of Sheet No. 7 exists because Prager put violet, pansy, green carnation and lavender on one table in Four Flowering Plants That Have Been Decidedly Queered, JSTOR Daily, 29 January 2020. The gathering is hers and is credited as hers on both pages. The reading — that the four are one process caught at four moments — is ours.

Two sentences of hers are quoted directly, both read from the live article on 2026-09-08 by fetching the page and reading the body text rather than a summary of it:

The green carnation became a queer symbol in 1892 when Oscar Wilde instructed a handful of his friends to wear them on their lapels to the opening night of his comedy Lady Windermere's Fan.

One of the most notable uses of "lavender" comes from the historian Carl Sandburg, who wrote in 1926 of Abraham Lincoln: "A streak of lavender ran through him; he had spots soft as May violets."

Read the article, not a summary of it. The first pass at this sheet took her Sandburg sentence from an automated summary of the page, which rendered it accurately but would not have supported quoting her. A summariser is a transcription, and this ledger already holds an entry (the Kelly/Eno warning inherited from Star Stuff) about what transcriptions do to wording. The quotations above come from the article's own HTML.

Carl Sandburg (1926) — the streak of lavender, and the man it is about Link to this section

Quoted on: flower-codes.html

Joshua Speed was a deep-chested man of large sockets, with broad measurement between the ears. A streak of lavender ran through him; he had spots soft as May violets. And he and Abraham Lincoln told each other their secrets about women. Lincoln too had tough physical shanks and large sockets, also a streak of lavender, and spots soft as May violets.

Source: Carl Sandburg, Abraham Lincoln: The Prairie Years, volume 1 (Harcourt, Brace, 1926), page 265, opening Chapter 54. On page 266 the figure returns for both men at once: "had given these two men streaks of lavender, spots soft as May violets."

Verified: 2026-09-08, in two independently digitised copies from different holding institutions: the University of British Columbia Library's copy, scanned at the University of Toronto (abrahamlincolnpr01sand), and an Internet Archive copy scanned at Cebu (abrahamlincolnpr0001carl). Both read identically; the only differences are OCR artefacts on the word May. 1926 first-edition text, US public domain.

Three further Internet Archive copies were checked first and thrown out as witnesses. All three were scanned at the same centre, which is one pipeline and therefore one witness. That is the rule the Dickinson entry in this file wrote down after two copies from the same library agreed on a broken piece of type; this is the first time it has been applied before an error rather than after one.

The correction, and it is the point of the sheet. The sentence in circulation — including in Prager's article, and in a great many other places — is presented as Sandburg writing of Abraham Lincoln. The words are exactly Sandburg's and the "him" is Joshua Speed. Sandburg does extend the figure to Lincoln, in the next sentence but one and again on the following page, in different words each time.

This is not a fabrication and must not be written up as one. No word was altered, the author, book and year are right, and Sandburg did say it of Lincoln too, so the substance of the claim survives intact. What moved is the referent. Prager names Speed in her very next sentence and her book is partly about him, so this is compression in a much-retold line rather than ignorance — which is precisely why the sheet frames it as the site's own failure mode found in the wild, and not as a gotcha. If this entry is ever summarised, keep that framing with it.

Lord Alfred Douglas — Two Loves, and the line the court flattened Link to this section

Quoted on: flower-codes.html. The sheet's title is taken from line 3.

I dreamed I stood upon a little hill, / And at my feet there lay a ground, that seemed / Like a waste garden, flowering at its will / With buds and blossoms. There were pools that dreamed / Black and unruffled; there were white lilies / A few, and crocuses, and violets / Purple or pale, snake-like fritillaries / Scarce seen for the rank grass…

Source: Lord Alfred Douglas, Two Loves, first published in The Chameleon, December

  1. Public domain.

Verified: 2026-09-08, from the Wikisource transcription), read as raw wikitext rather than through a summariser. This is a single transcription and not a scan, which is weaker than everything else on this sheet. It is recorded here as such.

Corroborated in part. The poem's existence, its title, its author and its venue — The Chameleon, alongside Douglas's In Praise of Shame — are confirmed independently in The Trial of Oscar Wilde: From the Shorthand Reports (Paris, privately printed, 1906), read from the Internet Archive scan trialofoscarwild00wildrich. The final line is quoted there in court, which corroborates that line and no other.

A real variant, and the sheet makes something of it. The poem reads "I am the Love that dare not speak its name" — capitalised, a personified figure who has just given his name. The 1906 shorthand report has prosecuting counsel quoting it as "the love", lower case. The sheet quotes each source with its own capitalisation and says what the difference does.

Open, and cheap to close: a scan of The Chameleon itself would upgrade the garden lines from one transcription to a primary. Not found in the sources searched on 2026-09-08.

Wilde's answer in court, April 1895 Link to this section

Quoted on: flower-codes.html

Mr. Gill. — "I daresay! There is another sonnet. What construction can be put on the line, 'I am the love that dare not speak its name'?"

Witness. — "I think the writer's meaning is quite unambiguous. The love he alluded to was that between an elder and younger man, as between David and Jonathan; such love as Plato made the basis of his philosophy; such as was sung in the sonnets of Shakespeare and Michael Angelo; that deep spiritual affection that was as pure as it was perfect."

Source: The Trial of Oscar Wilde: From the Shorthand Reports (Paris, privately printed, 1906), pages 58–59. Public domain.

Verified: 2026-09-08, from the Internet Archive scan trialofoscarwild00wildrich, read as OCR text. The answer is quoted from where it is cut, not to where it ends — Wilde's speech continues past "perfect" for two more sentences. Stopping a quotation early at a sentence boundary needs no mark by ordinary practice, but an ellipsis is set there anyway and the caption says why, because this is a sheet about quotations that got shorter on their way through the world. If a future pass wants the rest, it is in the same paragraph. The reporter's own note that Wilde spoke "with great emphasis and some signs of emotion" and that the gallery answered with "a medley of applause and hisses" is quoted in the caption from the same page.

One thing the sheet corrects in passing: Gill calls Two Loves a sonnet in open court. It is not one. The sheet says so.

Alcaeus on Sappho, and Wharton's note on garlands Link to this section

Quoted on: flower-codes.html

Violet-weaving, pure, soft-smiling Sappho, I want to say something, but shame prevents me…

Source: Henry Thornton Wharton, Sappho: Memoir, Text, Selected Renderings and a Literal Translation (London, 1885), rendering a fragment of Alcaeus. Wharton glosses the epithet ἰόπλοκος as "violet-weaving" and notes the manuscript variant ἰοπλόκαμος, "with violet locks". The second quotation, "that plaiting wreaths was a sign of being in love," is Wharton's rendering of the ancient commentary on a different fragment. Public domain.

Verified: 2026-09-08, from the Project Gutenberg text of Wharton (ebook 57390).

Two things the sheet is careful about. The epithet is Alcaeus describing Sappho, not Sappho describing herself, and the sheet says so. And the famous "many crowns of violets" fragment is not in Wharton at all — its fuller text came off a papyrus published in 1902, seventeen years after this edition — so it is not quoted here. A later pass wanting that fragment needs a post-1902 public-domain translation, not this one.

The four botanical plates on the flower codes sheet Link to this section

Mounted on: flower-codes.html

All four are public domain in the United States and all four are captioned with artist, publication and year on the page.

PlateSourceNote
Birdfoot violet, Viola pedataHomer D. House, Wild Flowers of New York (University of the State of New York, 1918); photographs by Walter B. Starr and Harold H. SnyderWrong species for the argument
Pansy, Viola tricolor var. maximaPlate 33, Edward Step, Favourite Flowers of Garden and Greenhouse (Frederick Warne, 1896), plates arranged by D. Bois; BHL—
Carnations, Dianthus caryophyllusBirds and Nature (A. W. Mumford, Chicago, 1902), page 533; Smithsonian Institution Libraries copyWrong colour, and there is no right one
Lavender, LavandulaPlate 10, F. Edward Hulme and Shirley Hibberd, Familiar Garden Flowers, first series, 1907; BHL—

Both of the flagged plates are captioned with the problem on the page, in the caption, not in this file only. The violet is an American species standing in for a Mediterranean one and the caption says so. The carnations are pink and white because a green carnation is a white one stood in dye — no botanical plate of the flower Wilde's friends wore exists or could. Mounting either without the caption would be the quiet generalization this file exists to catch: an object standing in for a different object with the label left attached.

The violet is logged as Open, below.

Claims on the flower codes sheet that are named as somebody else's and not asserted Link to this section

On: flower-codes.html

The sheet's own rule, stated in a note on the page: where a claim belongs to a scholar and we have not read the primary, the claim is named as theirs and not repeated as ours. What that covers, all of it from Prager's article:

The .qe-drift list near the foot of the sheet is the one place this gets close to the line. Its lavender card compresses the arc into "a purge in the 1950s, an insult meant to frighten a movement in 1969, and a slogan printed on a shirt in 1970" — dates that come from Prager and are not sourced on our page. It reads as summary rather than assertion and the paragraph immediately under it disclaims it, but if any part of this sheet needs a credit-source pass before it grows, it is that card.

The pansy etymology Link to this section

On: flower-codes.html

thought, remembrance

regarded as a symbol of thought or remembrance

Source: the Online Etymology Dictionary entry for pansy, read 2026-09-08. Old French pensee/pencee, from penser "to think", from Latin pensare "consider"; into English mid-15c. as pense; the slang sense "recorded by 1929", which is linked at the point of use on the page.

Not a dictionary of record. Etymonline is a compilation, and for a claim carrying this much of a section's weight the OED would be better. The derivation is uncontroversial and the 1929 date is the load-bearing part, since it is what puts the word's turn inside the same decade as the drag scene that took the flower's name. If anyone here has OED access, this is a five-minute upgrade.

The labels treatment on the Coming to Terms sheet — seven sources, and which copy each came from Link to this section

Quoted on: coming-to-terms.html, in the section appended below Ryan's 2022 essay.

Verified: 2026-09-08. Six of the seven below were read in the work they come from. The seventh is a transcription of speech from a video and is labelled as one, on the page and here. Jordynn Jack's Gender Copia, the eighth source on that section, has its own entry after this one, because it is the one that started the day unreachable and did not stay that way.

What the "not from our own library" rule does and does not mean, corrected 2026-09-08. This entry first said the Stimpunks glossary pages were "the pointer, not the authority" and left it there, which is too strong and was corrected on Ryan Boren's objection. The rule exists to stop our own prose — a glossary gloss, a summary, a paraphrase — being read back as somebody else's wording; that is the Kelly-on-Eno scenius failure, where the thing being confirmed was a rewrite. A direct quotation Ryan transcribed from a paper he read, published with a citation to that paper, is not that. It is a first-hand reading with the source named, and treating it as unusable would throw out years of legitimate collecting and quietly assert that he did not read what he says he read.

So the working rule here is: re-reading is an upgrade, not a precondition. Where the primary is reachable, read it and say which copy — that is what happened with all six below, and it is what turned up the edition difference in the Jack entry. Where it is not reachable, a Stimpunks quotation with its citation attached is quotable, and the sheet says whose transcription it is. Papers get rented. Access lapses. The citation is the thing that has to be right.

1. Sonny Jane Wise — the smorgasbord.

If we're rolling with the analogy of a smorgasbord, there are a lot of different ingredients that make up the diversity of our minds. You could say each individual is a plate of various ingredients and tasty treats. Each of us are our own unique combination of ingredients and there are infinite combinations of ingredients.

Sonny Jane Wise (they/them), The Neurodiversity Smorgasbord: An Alternative Framework for Understanding Differences Outside of Diagnostic Labels, Lived Experience Educator. Read from the live page. "Each of us are" is theirs and is kept — the sentence is not tidied to agree. The date on the sheet, 27 September 2024, is the page's own datePublished; the page prints only "27 September" in its visible furniture, so the year comes from the site's structured data and nothing else.

2. Florence Ashley — the building materials.

To arrive at a gender identity, we arrange gender subjectivity like building materials. My theory helps us understand how different people offer seemingly incompatible accounts of their gender identity without questioning their authenticity or validity. They simply arrange similar building materials differently.

Florence Ashley, "What Is It like to Have a Gender Identity?", Mind 132:528, 1053–1073, doi:10.1093/mind/fzac071. Read in the published PDF hosted by the author at florenceashley.com, whose running head reads Mind, Vol. 132 · 528 · October 2023 and whose first page carries the DOI. The passage is the abstract, and the sheet says so. Pages and issue confirmed against Crossref; the month on the sheet is the one printed on the article itself, not Crossref's later print date.

3. Ira David Socol — the hinge.

Only when people get to choose their own labels will we get anywhere toward building an equitable culture.

Ira David Socol, guest post Using "Correct Language" And "People First", Bowllan's Blog, School Library Journal, 12 May 2009. The original address no longer resolves; read in the Internet Archive capture of 4 March 2021, which the sheet cites as such. It is the closing sentence of the post, immediately before the author's biographical note.

4. Nick Walker — the verb, then the adjective.

And, just like queer, the adjective form of neuroqueer can also serve as a label of social identity. One can neuroqueer, and one can be neuroqueer.

Or, to put it more concisely (but perhaps more confusingly): you're neuroqueer if you neuroqueer.

Nick Walker, Neuroqueer: An Introduction, neuroqueer.com. Read from the page, which states it was first published Spring 2015 and revised Summer 2021, and which points readers to Neuroqueer Heresies for the citable version. The italics are his and are reproduced, including the italic be — which is the whole point of the sentence and would vanish in a plain-text copy. Two paragraphs, not adjacent in the original: one intervening paragraph is elided and the sheet sets them as two blocks rather than running them together. Same source as the masthead quotation already logged above; Walker uses he/him.

5. Helen Edgar — the wrong object.

However, it is not labels that disable us or our children, it is the bureaucratic structure that attaches value and resources to labels rather than to authentic needs. When a child is only seen as deserving of support once labelled, the problem lies with the gatekeeping logic and finances of the institution and system, not the real identity and needs of the child.

and, on the slip wall:

Labels can become barriers when used inflexibly or in a pathologizing way.

Labels can also be liberating when used to affirm identity, understanding, and belonging when adopting a neuro-affirming approach.

Helen Edgar, Inclusion Needs Recognition, Not Erasure: A Neurodiversity-Affirming Approach, Autistic Realms, 18 October 2025. Read from the live page; the date is its datePublished. The byline reads "Helen Edgar (Autistic Realms) following a conversation with David Gray-Hammond". "pathologizing" is spelt with a z in the original, against the -ise spelling used elsewhere on her site, and is kept. The two slip sentences are consecutive lines in the original and she does not choose between them, which is why both are on the same slip rather than one being spent as the site's own conclusion.

A nearby sentence of hers — "Labels aren't everything but they can go a long way…" — was not quoted, because the same sentence contains "Autisic", a typo, and quoting it would mean either reproducing the typo, silently fixing it, or hanging a [sic] on a colleague. None of those three is worth it when the better sentence is two paragraphs down.

6. autisticltd — the shedding.

A list of words and identities doesn't really begin to scratch the surface of my experience and it's making me more insular than I'd like.

I'm reveling in the shedding of labels whilst appreciating the immense privilege I have to know who I am, to have words for my experiences, and the resources to find my own.

Shedding my labels, Autistic and Living the Dream, 4 March 2024. The blog carries no personal name. The post byline is the handle autisticltd, the contact page 404s, and no name appears in the page metadata; the sheet cites the handle and says on the page that it is doing so. That is a choice to respect, not a gap to fill — if a name is later published by its owner, this entry and the sheet can be updated together. "reveling" is spelt with one l in the original and is kept.

7. The Leftist Cooks — the buffet.

Language is not a set menu, it's a buffet.

Spider-Verse, Identity Politics, Leftist Infighting, and the Oppression Olympics, The Leftist Cooks, YouTube, uploaded 20 August 2023 — channel and upload date confirmed from the watch page. The wording is Ryan Boren's transcription, taken down while watching and published on the Stimpunks glossary.

This one was cut from the first draft and then put back. It was cut because every route to the caption track returned empty, so the wording could not be re-checked against the video: the en and en-asr tracks both return zero bytes to every format parameter. That is a reason to label the quotation, not to bin it. A spoken line has no authoritative text at all — there is no printing to go back to, only somebody's ear — and the citation names the video, the channel and the date, which is everything a reader needs to go and listen. So the sheet carries it with the transcription attributed on the page.

What is not done, in either direction. The line is not smoothed, and the buffet/set-menu construction is not reworded into our own prose either. Borrowing the figure while dropping the name would be the same taking with the credit filed off, and it is the move this file exists to catch.

Jordynn Jack — Gender Copia, and the two editions that punctuate it differently Link to this section

Quoted on: coming-to-terms.html, the section A copia, not a category — one block quotation from p. 3 and three inline quotations, two from p. 3 and one from the Conclusions on p. 14.

Source: Jordynn Jack, "Gender Copia: Feminist Rhetorical Perspectives on an Autistic Concept of Sex/Gender", Women's Studies in Communication 35:1 (2012), 1–17, doi:10.1080/07491409.2012.667519. Department of English and Comparative Literature, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Verified: 2026-09-08, by reading a scan of the printed article, supplied by Ryan Boren into the SKS inbox mid-session after this entry had been opened as a gap. Pages read: 1–4 and 13–16, which covers the abstract, the copia passage, the Conclusions, and the works-cited list. The running head on p. 1 gives the volume, pages and year directly; the issue number is Crossref's.

This entry began life in Open and said the article was unreachable. It was: OpenAlex reported no open copy, Semantic Scholar's abstract field is elided by the publisher, tandfonline returns 403, and every hit in our own library was one of our own pages quoting it. The sheet therefore described Jack's argument and said in the same breath that it was describing rather than quoting. The scan changed that, and the section was rewritten to quote her. Worth leaving on the record that the gap was named on the page before it was closed, because that is the behaviour this file is trying to make ordinary.

Jack writes autistic in lower case. House style here capitalizes it. Her sentences are reproduced as she set them, and the sheet says so in the caption, because the alternative is correcting a scholar's usage inside her own quotation marks.

The edition finding: slashes in print, equals signs in the digital text.

The passages as quoted on the Stimpunks glossary pages this material was gathered from read masculine=feminine, sex=gender, male=female, nature=culture, and symbolic=embodied. The printed pages read masculine/feminine, sex/gender, male/female, nature/culture, and symbolic/embodied.

Neither is a mistake, and this is not a correction of Stimpunks. Ryan Boren states that his piece quoted directly from the paper and that the wording is exact to the edition he read, and that is the better authority for what that edition says — the same principle already applied to Nick Walker's pronouns above. A solidus rendering as = is an ordinary artifact of a publisher's own digital typesetting, and the title of the very same article is Sex/Gender in both. So: two renderings of one text, both real, and a quotation is only correct once it is attached to the copy it came from.

Queering Earth quotes the print pages, because the print pages are what this session read, and the caption on the sheet names that copy. Do not "fix" the Stimpunks glossary against this entry, and do not fix this entry against the glossary. This is the Woolf trap in miniature: tidying either one against the other produces a quotation that is wrong while looking more careful than the alternative. If a future session wants the digital edition's characters on the page instead, it needs to cite the digital edition.

Erasmus, at one remove. Jack's "(17)" is a page reference to Desiderius Erasmus of Rotterdam: On Copia of Words and Ideas, ed. Donald King and David Rix (Milwaukee: Marquette University Press, 1963), read off her works-cited list on p. 16 and cited on the sheet as she cites it. We have not opened that book, and nothing on the sheet quotes Erasmus — the sentence about his two books, one on abundance of words and one on abundance of matter, is our own gloss and is supported by the title alone. An earlier draft dated De copia to 1512 and linked a 1521 Strasbourg scan; the date came from a tertiary source and is gone.

Stimpunks Foundation — kintsugi, and the line this site's seam came from Link to this section

Quoted on: design.html, in Age, and where the gold goes

Four quotations, all from the same page, all exact:

The cracks are where the gold goes.

we are not broken. We are kintsugi.

Kintsugi doesn't restore the original object. It makes something that couldn't have existed without the break.

Masking is the opposite of Kintsugi.

Source: Stimpunks Foundation, "Infodumplings: Kintsugi and Finding the Gold Within You", 6 May 2026.

Verified: 2026-09-09, against the mirrored post in SKS (site/stimpunks-org/posts/infodumplings-kintsugi-and-finding-the-gold-within-you.md, whose frontmatter carries the canonical URL above). The mirror is our own publication, so this is the one case where SKS is the primary — it is a copy of a page we wrote.

Capitalization preserved. "Masking is the opposite of Kintsugi" carries a mid-sentence capital K, and "we are not broken" opens lower-case because it is a fragment of "The thesis: we are not broken. We are kintsugi." Both are left as published, per the house rule on quotations.

Why this entry exists at all, when nobody asked for it. The kintsugi device on this site — --qe-marigold spent on a correction rather than on a mounting — was designed on 2026-09-09 from a general reading of kintsugi, and the working notes, the commit message, and the register entry all described it in our own words: the gold goes on the mend. Then a library search turned up our own foundation's page on kintsugi, published four months earlier, saying "The cracks are where the gold goes."

Nobody plagiarised anything. But a house phrase already existed, we had reinvented a near copy of it, and the version that would have shipped read as though the idea originated in a stylesheet. Over-crediting others and under-claiming for ourselves is the safe direction, and it applies to our own colleagues at least as much as to strangers. The page now cites theirs and calls ours the small version.

And it supplied the argument the design page was missing. "Masking is the opposite of Kintsugi" is what makes this device belong on a site about queering normativity rather than being imported warmth: a site about the cost of passing cannot file its own corrections where only maintainers can read them. That sentence is theirs. The application to an accession register is ours, and the page says which is which.

Hisamatsu Shin'ichi — the seven characteristics, at one remove and with the name unsettled Link to this section

Credited on: design.html, in Wabi-sabi, and which parts of it we can actually claim

The seven principles the section scores against are attributed to Hisamatsu Shin'ichi, Zen and the Fine Arts, Kodansha International, 1971 (ISBN 0870111507; English translation by Tokiwa Gishin). Hisamatsu (1889–1980) was a Zen philosopher at Kyoto University who studied under Nishida Kitarō and founded the FAS Society.

We have not read it. The seven reach this site through a peer-reviewed paper that cites it:

Source (secondary, and named as such on the page): Lomas, T., Etcoff, N., Van Gordon, W., & Shonin, E. (2017). Zen and the Art of Living Mindfully: The Health-Enhancing Potential of Zen Aesthetics. Journal of Religion and Health, 56(5), 1720–1739. <https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-017-0446-5>

Verified: 2026-09-09. The citation was pinned from Crossref's own record for that DOI rather than from a search summary — volume 56, issue 5, pages 1720–1739 — because the Wassell entry above is this ledger's standing lesson about online-first dates and unpaginated PDFs. The set of seven was cross-checked against three independent renderings. The paper itself was not read in full, and neither was Hisamatsu; nothing on the page is presented as either source's wording.

Three things the page says out loud rather than smoothing over.

1. The seven are not wabi-sabi's. They are characteristics of Zen art. The list circulates online as "the seven principles of wabi-sabi", which is a relabelling that happened in transmission — Zen aesthetics and wabi-sabi overlap and are not the same thing.

2. The third one's name is unsettled and we could not settle it. Lomas et al. give koko (austere sublimity). Another rendering of the same seven gives shibui/shibumi (lofty dryness) in the same slot, with the same sense. The page uses koko, says the renderings disagree, and says it cannot resolve it from here. Only the book can.

This corrects a claim we made earlier the same day. The first version of the 2026-09-09 register entry and decision log stated flatly that the design article had swapped shibui in where Hisamatsu has koko. That is not established — at least one rendering of Hisamatsu gives shibui for that characteristic. The confident version was written from memory before anything was checked, which is precisely the failure mode this file exists for, and it was caught by the decision log's own instruction to verify before the claim reached public copy. Corrected in DECISIONS.md, in changelog.html, and here.

3. What survives the correction, because it is checkable. Whatever the term should be, the design advice that prompted all this glosses its third principle as quiet, unobtrusive beauty revealing depth over time — a definition with no age in it. That is a statement about two texts a reader can open, and it needs no ruling on Hisamatsu's vocabulary. It is also the reason "patina" recurs in that literature without ever becoming a principle.

Not cited for anything it does not support. Leonard Koren's Wabi-Sabi for Artists, Designers, Poets & Philosophers (Stone Bridge Press, 1994) is named on the page as the book through which wabi-sabi reached English-language design writing, and for nothing else. We have not read it either, so the page makes no claim about what Koren does or does not enumerate — which is the specific temptation here, since several secondary summaries attribute "seven principles" to him too.

Emily Dickinson — Letter 997, and three small changes on the way to us Link to this section

Quoted on: monotropa-uniflora.html

That without suspecting it you should send me the preferred flower of life, seems almost supernatural, and the sweet glee that I felt at meeting it, I could confide to none. I still cherish the clutch with which I bore it from the ground when a wondering Child, an unearthly booty, and maturity only enhances mystery, never decreases it.

Source: Emily Dickinson to Mabel Loomis Todd, 30 September 1882 — Letter 997 in The Letters of Emily Dickinson, p. 689. AC 765, in pencil; first published in Letters (1894); postmarked 30 September 1882. Todd had sent her a painted panel of Indian pipes on 24 September.

Verified: 2026-09-09, by Ryan Boren, from his own copy of the Letters. The sheet quotes the first two sentences only and the primary continues.

Three differences from the version we started with. The reading of this letter in general circulation — including the More Realms essay this sheet follows — differs from the Letters text in three places:

circulatingLetter 997
to none — I stillto none. I still
a wondering childa wondering Child
enhances the mysteryenhances mystery

A dash where there was a full stop, a capital lowercased, and a word inserted. Nobody did this on purpose and it is the most ordinary thing in the world — it is what happens to a quotation copied from a copy. It is recorded here for one reason: the sheet's own subject is that Dickinson's punctuation and capitals were regularised by her first editors, and here is the same three-part drift happening to the same writer in 2026, in a friendly source, at a scale of three characters. The pattern is the finding, not the fault. Our text follows the Letters.

Not corrected on More Realms from here. Helen's essay is hers. Logged in DECISIONS.md as an open item for a session in that repo.

Emily Dickinson — 'Tis whiter than an Indian pipe, and the alternatives 1896 adopted Link to this section

Quoted on: monotropa-uniflora.html, mounted in full

Source: About 1879, in pencil on a fragment of stationery — Amherst Manuscript 483. Text from R. W. Franklin, The Poems of Emily Dickinson: Variorum Edition (Belknap Press, 1998), Fr1513A, as published in the Emily Dickinson Archive.

Verified: 2026-09-09, against Franklin's text and textual notes in the Archive record. The rendering in the More Realms essay matches Franklin word for word; only the dash glyphs differ, which is typesetting rather than text.

Dickinson left alternatives, and the first printing took two of them. Franklin records three: imply] denote (line 5), intimate] designate (line 6), What function] What customs (line 8). The Archive's publication history reads: "Poems (1896), 156, as three quatrains, with the alternatives for lines 5 and 8 adopted." So the version that circulated for decades reads denote and What customs, and neither is an error — she wrote both. An editor resolving a poet's options silently and printing the result as the poem is the same move as removing her dashes, which is the subject of Sheet No. 6, and the sheet says so.

Virginia Woolf — the androgynous mind, and a hedge worth keeping Link to this section

Quoted on: monotropa-uniflora.html

He meant, perhaps, that the androgynous mind is resonant and porous; that it transmits emotion without impediment; that it is naturally creative, incandescent and undivided.

Source: Virginia Woolf, A Room of One's Own, chapter VI — Hogarth Press Uniform Edition (1935), pp. 148–149; first published September 1929.

Verified: 2026-09-09, in the book, from the copy Ryan put in the SKS inbox. This closes the open item that had stood since 2026-09-08, when the line was found on More Realms cited to a secondary rather than to Woolf.

The wording is exactly right, and the attribution was the only problem. The circulating form — "resonant and porous… naturally creative, incandescent and undivided" — is Woolf's, with the ellipsis correctly marking the clause it drops. Nothing was tightened.

But the sentence is a guess about Coleridge, twice hedged, and we keep the hedge. Two sentences earlier Woolf writes "Coleridge certainly did not mean, when he said that a great mind is androgynous, that…" — so the he is Coleridge, and Woolf's own sentence opens "He meant, perhaps," after a preceding "Perhaps the androgynous mind is less apt…". Quoting from "the androgynous mind is resonant and porous" turns Woolf speculating about another critic into Woolf defining a mind. It is a small strengthening and it is the shape this ledger exists to catch, so the sheet quotes from He meant, perhaps and names Coleridge in the caption.

Mary Oliver — the attention sentence, and the wrong book Link to this section

Quoted on: monotropa-uniflora.html

Attention without feeling, I began to learn, is only a report. An openness — an empathy — was necessary if the attention was to matter.

Source: Mary Oliver, Our World (Beacon Press, 2007).

Verified: 2026-09-09, by Ryan Boren, from his own copies — including by failing to find it where it was supposed to be.

Two findings, and this is the clearest example of tightening in this whole ledger. The sentence is widely quoted, and the More Realms essays this sheet follows quote it, as:

"Attention without feeling, is only a report." — Mary Oliver, Upstream: Selected Essays (2016)

A citation nobody could check. The reason this survived is that a reader who wanted to verify it would have gone to Upstream and not found it, and most readers do not go. It took someone owning both books.

Not corrected on More Realms from here. Logged in DECISIONS.md for a session in that repo. Our sheet quotes the full two sentences, cites Our World, and says on the page that this is not where the line is usually credited.

Dinah Murray, Jeanette Buirski, and Wenn Lawson — monotropism, and a byline that lags a name Link to this section

Credited on: monotropa-uniflora.html

I haven't really ever had a career, I've had a mission.

Source of the quotation: Dinah Murray, interviewed by Kate Fox in Dalgety Bay about a month before her death on 7 July 2021, quoted in Fox's tribute to Dinah Murray, 16 August

  1. Verified: 2026-09-09, on Fox's page. This reaches us through Fox rather than from a recording, and the caption says so.

The coinage: monotropism was coined by Dinah Murray with her neighbour Jeanette Buirski, and set out in Murray, Lesser and Lawson (2005), Attention, monotropism and the diagnostic criteria for autism, Autism 9(2), 139–156, <https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361305051398>. Citation pinned from Crossref. The paper itself has not been read here, and nothing is quoted from it.

The third author is Wenn Lawson, and the journal's byline is not the name he uses. He is a trans man who has published as Wenn for years. Crossref, the journal record and most citation managers still carry the 2005 byline, so a citation generated automatically deadnames him. Reproducing a publisher's record over a living author's own name is not neutral accuracy — it is a database outranking a person. We cite him as Wenn Lawson and do not reproduce the byline. The DOI is what makes the paper findable, so the old name was never doing that work and printing it cost something for nothing. Helen Edgar's essay already does this correctly and is where we saw it done.

Stimpunks Foundation — the mission, and two wordings of it on one page Link to this section

Quoted on: mission.html

We exist for the direct support and mutual aid of neurodivergent and disabled people.

Stimpunks builds accessible infrastructure and public tools that support disabled and neurodivergent people to live with dignity, challenge dehumanizing systems, and design environments that honor difference as strength.

We enable the weird, feral, chaotic, and magical people.

Source: Stimpunks Foundation, Mission, stimpunks.org.

Verified: 2026-09-09, read from the page itself rather than from our own library. The three sentences are in the "We, Stimpunks" statement blocks; the third heads the We enable section.

Their capitalisation and their spelling, kept. House style capitalises Autistic and Disabled and spells honour; the quotation does neither, and a quotation is not the place to apply house style. honor and dehumanizing are US spellings on a US foundation's site.

Two wordings of the mission appear on that one page, and we quoted the longer. The "We, Stimpunks" block says Stimpunks builds tools that support people to live with dignity, challenge dehumanizing systems, and design environments that honor difference as strength. The Mission Compass further down the same page says it enables people to live with dignity, and stops there. We quoted the first because it is the fuller statement and because our page leans on its three verbs; noted here because a reader who checks the primary will find both, and discovering a discrepancy unrecorded is how a ledger loses its value.

Not paraphrased, deliberately. /mission says so in the sentence introducing the quotation: the paraphrase is where a mission goes soft, and paraphrase-wearing-a-name is the failure this whole file exists to prevent.

Helen Edgar — More Realms, and the method stated on her own landing page Link to this section

Quoted on: mission.html

This is not a place of conclusions or answers, it’s a place to wander, to feel, to think sideways, expand, explore and be inspired.

Source: Helen Edgar, More Realms, landing page.

Verified: 2026-09-09, read from the page.

Her punctuation, including the comma splice and the curly apostrophe. The sentence joins two independent clauses with a comma; that is how it is written and it is not ours to tidy.

Why it is on our mission page. Queering Earth says there are no hard facts here for everything and that the room left open is the product. Helen had written the same commitment on her own site before this one existed, in her words rather than ours — so the page quotes her rather than restating it, which would have made our sentence look like the original.

Max Alexander — A Playful Manifesto, and one preposition Link to this section

Quoted on: manifesto.html, index.html

This is a manifesto that begins but will never end. This is a translation of my world to yours. This is a celebration of existence; mine, yours and theirs. This is a public display of affection for each and every creature. This is a protest of the notion that there is any correct way to live. This is a public display of rejection of the idea that one's usefulness is a measure of their humanity. This is a love letter to joy to sadness to fear and discovery.

But, most of all, this is a call to play.

Source: Max Alexander, A Playful Manifesto, Play Radical. Written and illustrated by Alexander; the site sells a print copy.

Verified: 2026-09-09, read at source.

THE CIRCULATING VERSION HAS DRIFTED, AND IT DRIFTED IN OUR OWN HOUSE. Ryan supplied the quotation for this page as:

"This is a manifesto that begins but will never end. This is a translation of my world into yours….This is a protest of the notion that there is any correct way to live."

which is what the Neuroqueer Learning Spaces Manifesto on stimpunks.org carries. Two departures from the source, both small and both the characteristic kind:

  1. into yours for to yours. One preposition, and it changes the image — a translation to somebody is offered; a translation into them is done to them. Alexander wrote the first.
  2. An ellipsis swallowing three sentences. Between "yours" and "This is a protest" stand the celebration of existence, the public display of affection, and nothing else worth losing. Compressing them is defensible; doing it with …. and no note is how a reader comes to think the two sentences are adjacent.

So this page quotes the opening whole and says on the face of it that the circulating version is tightened, naming our own foundation's page as where we found it. A ledger that only catches other people's tightening is not a ledger, it is a defence. Nothing here is a criticism of the NQLS manifesto, which is a community document doing a different job; but stimpunks.org is editable by the people who run this site, and this entry is the record that it wants fixing there too. DECISIONS.md carries that as an open item.

ONE SENTENCE OF IT IS ALSO SET AS A BROADSIDE ON THE HOME PAGE, under The type plays, and the words do not move — This is a protest of the notion that there is any correct way to live, broken across six lines at six sizes in three faces. The setting is ours; not one word of it is. A sentence lifted out of the seven and given a display treatment is exactly where a tightening would happen unnoticed, so it is quoted whole, inside a blockquote with its cite, and the caption points at the sheet that carries the whole opening. The line breaks are display: block on spans with real spaces between them, so the sentence copies out, indexes, and reaches index.md as one sentence rather than as six.

Nick Walker — weirding, from a recorded conversation we have not heard Link to this section

Quoted on: manifesto.html

And so weird, I think about it like the word Queer, as a verb. There's this act of weirding, of letting the Magic in, of making cracks in the normal to let all the magic in.

Source: Nick Walker, in conversation on the Weird Pride Day panel of David's Divergent Discussions.

NOT VERIFIED AGAINST THE PRIMARY, AND THE PAGE SAYS SO. This is quoted from the transcription in the Neuroqueer Learning Spaces Manifesto, which labels it "in conversation, edited". The primary is a recording; nobody here has listened to it and checked the words. Under this file's own rule — where the primary is not reachable, quote it with the citation attached and name whose transcription it is — that is permitted, and the figcaption on the sheet names the transcription rather than the tape.

Why it is worth carrying anyway. Walker's own definition of neuroqueer as a verb is already quoted on the home page and verified at source; this extends the same move to weird, which is the subject of Sheet No. 4. The sheet's whole argument is that wyrd was demoted from fate to defect, and Walker turning weird back into a verb is that history running the other way.

What would upgrade it: somebody listening to the panel and confirming the wording, or Walker's own written statement of the same point. Until then the citation is the transcription, and the page does not pretend otherwise.

Grada Kilomba — Who Can Speak?, two contiguous lines Link to this section

Quoted on: manifesto.html

They have facts, we have opinions. They have knowledges, we have experiences.

Source: Grada Kilomba, "Who Can Speak?", in Decolonizing Knowledge (2016).

NOT VERIFIED AGAINST THE PRIMARY. Quoted from the rendering in the Neuroqueer Learning Spaces Manifesto; the book has not been opened here. Named on the sheet as such.

Two contiguous lines out of a longer passage, deliberately. The full passage is twenty-odd lines of paired clauses and quoting it entire would be a substantial reproduction of a copyrighted work on a page that needs two lines to make its point. Contiguous matters more than short: selecting the most striking lines from across the passage would produce a tightened Kilomba — the failure this file exists for — where taking two that sit together leaves the rhythm and the argument intact and elides nothing inside the quotation.

The Neuroqueer Learning Spaces Manifesto — the source this page adapts Link to this section

Adapted on: manifesto.html

Source: "Neuroqueer Learning Spaces Manifesto" by Stimpunks Foundation, Autistic Realms, et al., licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. A community project initiated by Ryan Boren (Stimpunks) and Helen Edgar (Autistic Realms), with contributions from David Gray-Hammond, Kay Louise Aldred, Dan Aldred, Pernille Fraser, Max Alexander, Je'anna Clements and Jorn Bettin. Read at source 2026-09-09.

Not a quotation but an adaptation, which is the harder case. /manifesto takes the frame — normal as an arrangement, weirding as a verb, whose knowledge is allowed to count — off the subject of learning spaces and points it at reading. No sentence is carried across verbatim; the argument is.

TWO OF THE NINE AUTHORS WROTE THIS PAGE, AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHY THE CREDIT MATTERS. It would be easy to treat a document Ryan and Helen initiated as theirs to carry over without ceremony. Nine people wrote it. Its argument is theirs collectively, the share-alike clause is the reason this adaptation is permitted at all, and the same clause is why anyone may do this again to our page. The section at the foot of /manifesto names every contributor and the licence, in the page itself rather than only here.

Sheet No. 9 — Carroll, Deleuze, Lévi-Strauss, and Brady Link to this section

Quoted on: five-unmistakable-marks.html. Nine mounted specimens. Verified: 2026-09-10.

The Deleuze quotations are from the FRENCH primary, and every English rendering on the sheet is ours. The Logic of Sense is not sold as an ebook and Ryan does not have it; Mark Lester's English exists and has not been read here, so it is not quoted. Quoting Lester through a secondary source would put a translator's authored choices in Deleuze's mouth at a page number nobody here could open — a sharper version of the failure this file exists to catch, because a translation is itself somebody's authorship. The English is labelled a gloss rather than a translation on the sheet, the same treatment as the wyrd bið ful ārǣd half-line on Sheet No. 4.

Read off the page images, not the text layer. This scan's optical transcription drops accents and breaks words across lines, so every French quotation was read from the rendered page and the page number confirmed against the running head. The page numbers are the French ones and will not match an English copy, which the sheet states.

quotedcredited towhere it was readpage
<q lang="fr">le sens est le Snark</q>, and the hunt as the search for senseGilles DeleuzeLogique du sens (Les Éditions de Minuit, 1969), third series, De la propositionp. 31
<q lang="fr">Snark est un mot-valise…</q> and the qualification <q lang="fr">secondairement ou accessoirement</q>Gilles Deleuzesame, eleventh series, Du non-sensp. 60
the empty square — <q lang="fr">une case vide, une place sans occupant</q>Gilles Deleuzesame, eighth series, De la structurep. 65
the floating signifier — <q lang="fr">un signifiant flottant…</q> and <q lang="fr">en elle-même vide de sens…</q>Claude Lévi-Strauss, quoted by DeleuzeLogique du sens, in Deleuze's quotation markspp. 64–65
the five unmistakable marksLewis CarrollThe Hunting of the Snark, Fit the Second, in Project Gutenberg's transcription of the 1876 first edition—
Humpty-Dumpty's portmanteau theory, and frumiousLewis Carrollsame, the preface—
<q>For the Snark <em>was</em> a Boojum, you see.</q>Lewis Carrollsame, Fit the Eighth—
the supermarket-and-blender passage on the indeterminacy of desireJohn C. BradyDeleuze on Sense, Series, Structures, Signifiers and Snarks (Part B), Epoché Magazine 03, June 2017, section Reversing Senseread in place
the coining of neurodivergent, and <q>Neurodivergent is for all of us.</q>Kassiane Asasumasu, writing as Neurodivergent KPSA from the actual coiner of "neurodivergent", on the blog Lost in my Mind TARDISundated — see below
<q>I originally conceived of neuroqueer as a verb…</q>Nick Walkeralready verified above — see Nick Walker — neuroqueering as a verb—

Three things are labelled on the sheet rather than smoothed over, and all three are the characteristic failure caught early:

  1. Lévi-Strauss is at one remove. His words reached us inside Deleuze's book. The primary is his 1950 introduction to the work of Marcel Mauss, not read here, so the floating signifier is credited to him on Deleuze's authority and not on ours.
  2. One sentence of Carroll's preface is quoted around, not through. Gutenberg's transcription reads <q>leave it unsettled which you will first</q>, which appears to want a word. Whether the gap is Carroll's or the transcriber's is not established, so the quotation starts after it. Inserting the obvious word would be a tightened source, and it is no less so because the text is out of copyright and the repair looks harmless.
  3. Kassiane Asasumasu's post was read in place on 2026-09-10 and is quoted from that reading. Her wording is preserved exactly — the ampersand, the lowercase autistic, the capitalised ALL, and the profanity. Tidying any of it would be the tightening this file exists to catch, and doing it to an Autistic activist's post about her own word would be that failure at its worst. Two things about the citation need saying, and both are on the sheet.

The post is signed Neurodivergent K of Radical Neurodivergence Speaking, not Kassiane Asasumasu. The blog's display name is Lost in my Mind TARDIS. The identification is not ours: it comes from the reference list of Helen Edgar's neuro-affirming language glossary, which cites Asasumasu, K. at exactly this address. Credit goes to her under the name she is known by, with the signature recorded, because a sheet about coiners losing their coinages should not quietly drop the name she actually signed.

The post carries no absolute date. Tumblr displays only a relative timestamp, which read <q>Posted 11 years ago</q> when the page was fetched on 2026-09-10. The post id is 121295972384. The earliest Wayback capture found is 2021-05-03, which bounds it and no more. So it is cited undated, with the timestamp and the reading date recorded rather than a year derived from them — the derivation would land on 2015 and would be ours, presented as the page's. Her dating of the coinage is hers, and the sheet leans on it rather than on our inference: <q>before tumblr was even a thing, like a decade or more ago</q>. The sheet says the 2000s, which is also how Helen's glossary dates it.

Deleuze's etymology for Snark and Brady's do not agree, and the sheet says so rather than picking one: Deleuze gives shark + snake, Brady suggests an antiquated verb to snark, to snort. Carroll explained frumious and left Snark alone. Neither reading is presented as his.

Read, and it corrected the sheet rather than confirming it: why the Snark is barely drawn. See Holiday's 1898 article above. What remains unread is Anne Clark's biography (pp. 196–97), which Wikipedia cites for the veto and which nothing on the sheet now depends on, and the 1932 first publication of the refused drawing, of which no public-domain copy was found.

Two plates and a recording, added the same day. All three are public domain and all three are credited to a person rather than to a licence.

objectcredited tosourceprovenance
the Ocean-Chart, a ruled frame with nothing inside itHenry Holiday (1839–1927)Wikimedia Commonsengraved for the 1876 first edition; scanned from a Macmillan printing of 1931. Master 3,540 × 5,924, sha256 d869a579d703891630e751bf77eb2e21b35c2154d1110bb48e4cb55821ccfe6e
the Barrister's Dream, the only depiction of the Snark in the bookHenry HolidayWikimedia Commonssame edition and printing. Master 5,184 × 3,600, sha256 2ff9687316b0eb4342c4708949a6860a91e2084458ea2406f1e7bcead9483d09
a reading of the whole poem, 29 min 24 sRobert Garrison, readerthe file page, recorded for LibriVoxreleased into the public domain by the reader. Linked, never embedded — see below

The captions carry two dates because the scan and the engraving are different objects. The illustrations are Holiday's, cut for the 1876 first edition; the paper photographed is a 1931 Macmillan printing. Saying only 1876 would credit the engraving and misdescribe the scan, and saying only 1931 would do the reverse. Holiday died in 1927, so the engravings are public domain on life-plus-seventy regardless of which printing was photographed.

The stored originals are downsampled and that is a deliberate departure. CLAUDE.md calls the original JPEG the archival copy, and these two masters are 4.9 MB and 8.3 MB against 116–341 KB for every other plate here. An img fallback is the one image path no srcset protects, so the stored copies are 2,176 px wide — exactly twice the 1,088 px top rung, so the largest variant is a clean 2:1 downsample. The masters stay at Commons, and their dimensions and hashes are recorded above, which is provenance by citation. Every other plate on this site already relies on it.

The recording is a link and not a player, and the reason is a capability rather than a taste. An embedded player would need a second encoding (Ogg Vorbis alone is unreliable in Safari), a MIME type taught to serve.mjs, a cache rule in _headers, a line in check-cache.mjs, and 18 MB in the repo — more than the whole site. /privacy exempts <a href> because a link the reader chooses to follow is not a request the page made, so a link costs nothing and adds no capability.

Garrison is named on the sheet, in the label block, as the performer. A recording released into the public domain still had somebody read it aloud for half an hour. On a sheet about coinages losing their coiners, filing his work under <q>a public-domain recording</q> would have been the sheet doing the thing it condemns, one line below a section about exactly that.

Henry Holiday's 1898 article, found and read. The Snark's Significance, The Academy No. 1343 (Saturday, 29 January 1898), vol. 53, pp. 128–129, signed and dated 26 January 1898 — twelve days after Carroll died. Two passages are quoted on the sheet, both read off the page images, which matters here more than usual: the Internet Archive scan's text layer mangles this exact passage, rendering Mr. Dodgson as Mr. ey and dropping a delightful monster altogether.

quotedwhere
the Boojum drawing: <q>a delightful monster, but that it was inadmissible</q>, and Holiday's hope that a future Darwin will vindicate himp. 129
the poem's origin: the last line arrived first and <q>the poem was written up to them</q>p. 129

THE VERSION IN CIRCULATION DROPS THREE WORDS AND CHANGES THE ACT. Secondary accounts have Carroll rejecting the drawing as <q>inadmissible</q>, which reads as distaste. Holiday wrote that Carroll called it <q>a delightful monster, but that it was inadmissible</q> — he liked it and refused it anyway, to keep the creature unimaginable. That is a tightened source in the wild, of exactly the kind this file exists to catch, and it was caught only by reading the primary: the sheet had been carrying the shortened version as an explicitly unverified report, and the fix was not to verify it but to find that it was wrong.

A second lesson, about how the primary nearly failed us the same way. The OCR of this page loses delightful monster. An automated read of the primary would have reproduced the secondary version's error by a different route, and reported it as verified. On this site the page image is the source and the text layer is a finding aid — the same rule the Deleuze quotations run on, now paid for twice.

Closed by this: the sheet no longer asserts the veto as an unverified report, and no longer needs Anne Clark's biography, which Wikipedia cites for it and which remains unread here.

Two children's poems, both public domain, and one word the compositor got wrong Link to this section

Quoted on: Two Cohabitating Modes, both in full.

Edith King, The Hedgehog — in Fifty New Poems for Children: An Anthology (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1922), page 49. Public domain. Verified 2026-09-10, off the page scan of that edition — the Internet Archive copy mirrored at Wikimedia Commons as Fifty_new_poems_for_children;an_anthology_..._(IA_fiftynewpoemsfor00unse).pdf, rendered at 300 dpi and read from the letterforms.

THE 1922 EDITION PRINTS "runts and digs", AND THE READING THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN WRONG IS THE SENSIBLE ONE. The stanza is a snout that smells "like us, of course, / But also runts and digs". Runts is not a verb; roots is what a pig's snout does and is the sense the stanza is built on. Every transcription we found also reads "runts" — which is the condition under which a whole tradition of copies is a single witness, so none of them is evidence.

So the scan's own OCR text layer was not trusted either, OCR being the one witness guaranteed to make exactly this error. Magnified, the "u" is open-topped and unmistakable against the closed "o" of "also" two words earlier. The sheet prints runts, and makes the argument for roots outside the quotation marks. A silent correction would leave King saying a word she did not print.

The same pass found the circulating transcriptions putting full stops at four line-ends where the 1922 setting has commas — "quiet wood," "a pig's," "of course," "hair or fur," and "from foes,". The commas are hers and the sheet has them.

Open: whether a later impression of the anthology corrected runts to roots. Only the 1922 first edition has been read, and a later correction would not change what this page quotes.

Anonymous, rhyme CXXXIII ("The fox and his wife they had a great strife") — collected in James Orchard Halliwell, The Nursery Rhymes of England, fifth edition (London and New York: Frederick Warne and Co., 1886), pages 84–86. Public domain. Also in Halliwell's 1843 edition, so it was in the collection forty years earlier. Sung as The Fox or Daddy Fox, in variants older than either printing.

Verified 2026-09-10 in three witnesses. Text taken from the Project Gutenberg transcription of the 1886 edition (ebook 32415, proofread from Internet Archive images), then checked line by line against the text layers of two independent scans of that same edition — nurseryrhymesofe00hall and the Google-digitised nurseryrhymesen00hallgoog. The three agree on every word. The two line-end marks where raw OCR differed from the proofread text — a comma after "great strife" and a semicolon after "whole life" — are settled by the Google scan agreeing with Gutenberg.

The refrain indent is the 1886 setting's, reproduced with .l-in; the spaces the compositor set before every exclamation mark are closed up, which is the decision Sheet No. 3 already took for Rossetti's colons.

THERE IS NO FOX IN KING'S ANTHOLOGY, and that was checked rather than assumed. The obvious companion piece would have been a fox poem from the same 1922 book. Its contents list and its author index were both read: the word fox does not occur in it. King's eleven poems there are a rabbit, a bat, a mole, a duck, a swallow, a beetle and the rest.

Education Review credits a review to the author of the book it reviews Link to this section

Quoted on: Two Cohabitating Modes, one paragraph, whole.

The correct citation: Pieter Vanhuysse, University of Haifa, Bees and Foxes, Spiders and Hedgehogs, an essay review of Michael Murray (ed.), A Jacques Barzun Reader and Stephen Jay Gould, The Hedgehog, The Fox, and the Magister's Pox. Education Review vol. 9 no. 1, 1 January 2006, <https://doi.org/10.14507/er.v0.1360>. Verified 2026-09-10 in the article PDF.

THE JOURNAL'S OWN RECORD CREDITS IT TO STEPHEN JAY GOULD. The landing page at edrev.asu.edu/index.php/ER/article/view/1360 carries <meta name="citation_author" content="Gould Stephen Jay">, so every citation manager pointed at that page produces a citation crediting a review to its subject — a man who had been dead for four years when it ran, and whose book is one of the two being reviewed.

Four things in the PDF settle it: the first page names Pieter Vanhuysse of the University of Haifa under the title; the running head on every page reads "Vanhuysse: Bees and Foxes, Spiders and Hedgehogs"; the abstract is first person about Gould in the third — "I argue that Barzun and Gould contribute valuable insights"; and the last page carries an About The Author paragraph and his university address. The same record also files the article as volume 13 where the PDF's running head says volume 9, number 1.

Nothing of ours was wrong, which is the only reason this is not a correction. But it is precisely the collapse check-metadata.mjs refuses in our own JSON-LD — author is who wrote our reading, about.author is who made the thing read — arriving from a peer-reviewed journal and propagating into every bibliography built from it.

Licence. Education Review content of that period is under CC BY-NC-SA 3.0, and the PDF states copyright is retained by the author. The paragraph on the sheet is quoted, not adapted, so nothing on this site takes that licence — which matters, because BY-NC-SA is not compatible with the CC BY-SA 4.0 our own words carry.

One error inside the quotation is kept, because it is his. Vanhuysse calls Archilochus "fifth-century"; he is seventh — dated by his own fragments, which mention the solar eclipse of 6 April 648 BC and the wealth of Gyges of Lydia. The words inside quotation marks are not ours to tidy, so the correction sits outside them, on the sheet, where a reader can weigh it.

Liv, on life as a hedgehog — and a site that is gone Link to this section

Quoted on: Two Cohabitating Modes, one paragraph, whole.

Liv, Life as a hedgehog, Traumatism — "field notes from living with Complex PTSD, DID and Autism" — 7 September 2021. Verified 2026-09-10 against the Internet Archive capture of 8 May 2022, which is the only copy there is: traumatism-fieldnotes.com no longer resolves. The post and its seven comments are in that capture; Liv replies in four of them.

Ryan's brief carried the paragraph already, and it matches the capture word for word, including two things that would be easy to smooth and are not ours to smooth: the single quotation marks around 'prove' and 'enough', and "loosing the plot", which is Liv's spelling.

LIV WRITES AS "WE" AND THE PLURAL IS THEIRS. The post is about living with DID and says so — "Having different parts means we have, what could appear as, a similarly spiky profile." The plural is not an editorial we and it is not a slip. It is kept everywhere the sheet refers to them, and they/them is used where a pronoun is needed, because the capture states no pronouns.

Why this quotation is load-bearing rather than illustrative. It is the one source on the sheet that is neither a poem nor a scholar, and it is the only one describing what the metaphor costs. The sheet's hinge — that an armour which costs nothing to deploy is also the reason nobody believes you need support — is Liv's observation and not King's, and King's poem only turns out to contain it once you have read Liv.

The fox-and-hedgehog pairing with monotropism has no first use we can find Link to this section

Relied on, and flagged as unattributed, on: Two Cohabitating Modes.

The sheet reports that the hedgehog's one big thing and the fox's many things have been mapped onto monotropism and polytropism in neurodivergent writing and talking. We have not found who did that first, and the sheet says so in those words.

Two things are established and the join between them is not. Berlin does not mention attention, autism, or anything of the kind — he is sorting novelists and philosophers. Murray, Lesser and Lawson (2005) does not mention foxes or hedgehogs. The pairing is a later, informal synthesis circulating in community spaces, podcasts and conversation.

Monotropism was coined by Dinah Murray with her neighbour Jeanette Buirski, and set out in Murray, Lesser and Lawson (2005), Attention, monotropism and the diagnostic criteria for autism, Autism 9(2), 139–156, <https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361305051398>. The paper has not been read here and nothing is quoted from it — the citation is pinned from Crossref, as it is for the entry on monotropa-uniflora.html. The third author is Wenn Lawson and the journal's byline is not the name he uses; see that entry for why we cite him as Wenn and do not reproduce the byline.

The one instance the sheet cites is cited as an instance. The Fox and the Hedgehog: On Neurodiversity, episode Rethinking Scientific Minds, 2 June 2025, as listed by podcast.app and credited there to Linda MacDonald Glenn. The episode has not been listened to, the description reads as promotional copy, and the caption on the sheet says outright that it is evidence the pairing circulates and not a source for the claim. Nothing on the page rests on it.

Open: a first use in print or in a talk. If one exists, the sheet should credit it.

Archilochus, at two removes, and no Greek edition opened Link to this section

Referred to on: Two Cohabitating Modes.

The sheet gives the proverb as "the fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing" and credits Archilochus, a seventh-century poet and soldier from Paros.

NO GREEK EDITION HAS BEEN OPENED HERE, AND THE SHEET SAYS SO. The English above is a rendering in circulation, reaching the page through Isaiah Berlin's essay on Tolstoy by way of the Vanhuysse review above — which we did read. It is therefore at two removes, and it is presented as a rendering rather than as a translation this site can vouch for. The Greek is deliberately not set: it would be an unverified transcription, and the two house faces have no greek subset, so it would render in a system fallback like the Sappho on /flower-codes.

What would upgrade it: a Greek text of the fragment with an editor and a numbering, and a named translator for whichever English is used.

Open, at one remove and carried inside somebody else's quotation: Vanhuysse says the distinction "was further elaborated during the Renaissance by Erasmus of Rotterdam". The Adagia have not been consulted. The claim is on his authority, inside his quotation, and the sheet flags it as unresolved.

Two lines quoted from living authors, and one word of Sagan's changed in our own masthead Link to this section

Quoted on: Two Cohabitating Modes, one sentence each, in copyright, quoted with attribution.

Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark (1995), of his parents: "But in introducing me simultaneously to skepticism and to wonder, they taught me the two uneasily cohabiting modes of thought that are central to the scientific method." Dorion Sagan, Cosmic Apprentice: Dispatches from the Edges of Science (University of Minnesota Press, 2013): "Science's eye for detail, buttressed by philosophy's broad view, makes for a kind of alembic, an antidote to both."

Both are quoted from Ryan's own reading and both are also on Star Stuff's Who Is Holding the Candle. Neither page has been re-opened for this sheet and both captions say so.

THE PAGE'S TITLE IS OURS AND NOT SAGAN'S, BY ONE SYLLABLE. Sagan wrote cohabiting. The sheet is called Two Cohabitating Modes — Ryan's title, and the word is a real one. The difference does not change the meaning, and it is still a difference, so by this site's own rule the title is an adaptation and not a quotation: if we changed the words, they are ours.

The sheet states this in a note beside the specimen, and the specimen itself carries Sagan's sentence unaltered. Logged here because the rule has to survive contact with our own masthead, which is the one place nobody thinks to check — the same failure found in our own foundation's rendering of the Playful Manifesto, one preposition wide.

Stimpunks' own page on scientism, and a stacked list that is a summary of it Link to this section

Quoted on: Two Cohabitating Modes, one paragraph, whole.

Stimpunks Foundation, Facts, Fire, and Feels: Research-Storytelling from the Edges. Read at source 2026-09-10. Ours, and still cited, because a house source quoted without a citation is the pattern that produced the Playful Manifesto drift.

But we're also not anti-science. We're anti-scientism — the belief that science alone produces valid knowledge, that lived experience is noise to be filtered out, that the measurer doesn't belong in the measurement. Science and philosophy. Empiricism and voice. Skepticism and wonder. These aren't opposites. They're the whole point.

The bold is the page's own and is reproduced.

Ryan's brief carried the same idea as a stacked list — "Science + Philosophy / Skepticism + Wonder / Empiricism + Voice / Bio + Psycho + Social / Body + Mind / Bodyminds" — which also appears on that page. The prose is what the sheet quotes, because the stacked form is a summary device and the sentences are the claim. Quoting the list instead would have been a tightening in the other direction: the same words, with the argument taken out from between them.

Thomas Bewick, two wood engravings and two sentences, 1792 Link to this section

Mounted on: Two Cohabitating Modes — .qe-plate-wide in the hedgehog section and in the fox section, each with a .qe-specimen quoting the article it heads.

Thomas Bewick (1753–1828), wood engravings, in A General History of Quadrupeds (Newcastle upon Tyne: printed by and for S. Hodgson, R. Beilby & T. Bewick, 1792) — the hedgehog on page 448 and the Cur Fox on page 280. Public domain: the work is 1792, and a faithful photographic reproduction of a two-dimensional public-domain work attracts no new copyright.

Scanned by Smithsonian Libraries for the Biodiversity Heritage Library, Internet Archive item generalhistory00bewi, 504 images. The Archive record carries no rights statement and no licence URL; the age of the work is what settles it. Read, cropped and re-encoded here on 2026-09-10 — tools/make-plates.py, the wide ladder, the filename carrying the provenance.

The quotations, verified off the page images rather than the scan's text layer:

DESTITUTE of every other means of defence, is provided by Nature with a spinous armour, which secures it from the attacks of all the smaller beasts of prey; such as Weasels, Martins, Polecats, &c.—When alarmed, it immediately collects itself into the form of a ball, and presents on all sides a surface covered with sharp points, which few animals are hardy enough to engage. The more it is harrassed, the closer it rolls itself;

is the least, but the most common; and approaches nearest to the habitations of mankind. It lurks about the out-houses of the farmer, and carries off all the poultry within its reach.

Two transcription decisions, both stated in the captions. The long s of the 1792 setting is transcribed as s — the page reads "fpinous", "fecures", "beafts", "leaft", "moft" — which is a letterform and not a different letter. And "harrassed" is the printing's own spelling and is kept, on the same footing as King's "runts".

THE HEADING IS THE SUBJECT OF THE SENTENCE, AND THAT IS WHY BOTH QUOTATIONS BEGIN MID-GRAMMAR. Bewick sets the engraving, then the article's name, then a drop capital running straight on: The Hedge-hog, or Urchin, / "is provided by Nature with a spinous armour". Quoting from the drop capital gives a sentence with no subject, so the captions say where the subject is rather than silently supplying one in brackets.

The Greyhound Fox cut on page 279 was looked at and passed over, because it shows a fox with a kill — and a predation scene is the one thing the drawings on this page must not say, for the reason the tray mark's two animals face the same way.

One thing the caption has to say because the book is wrong about it. Bewick gives "three varieties of Foxes in this island" — Greyhound, Mastiff and Cur — and they are not three species. All are Vulpes vulpes; the division is an eighteenth-century sorting by size and build. Mounting "The Cur Fox" without saying so would let a reader take a retired taxonomy for a live one, on the authority of our page rather than his.

Open Link to this section

Who wrote the crooked tree — Waits, the screenplay, or Keret Link to this section

Drawn after on: index.html, #to-queer-is-to-adapt. Phrase quoted: four words, <q>growing strong and growing strange</q>.

The monologue is spoken by Tom Waits, as Kneller, in Wristcutters: A Love Story (2006), written and directed by Goran Dukić, adapted from Etgar Keret's novella Kneller's Happy Campers. A straight tree spends its life telling a crooked one what it is; the lumberjacks arrive and are told to cut all the straight trees; the crooked one is still there.

What is not established is who wrote it. It is widely repeated online that Waits improvised the speech, and we have not found that claim in a primary source — not in an interview with Waits, not with Dukić, and not in the published screenplay. It is equally possible it is Dukić's writing, or that it descends from Keret. A drawing does not require the answer, which is why the figure is captioned as spoken by Waits and makes no claim about authorship. But the site quotes four of the words, and four words have an author.

What would settle it: the screenplay, or an interview where Waits or Dukić says whose it is. Until then the caption says what we know — who said it, in what, directed by whom, from whose story — and says openly that we do not know who wrote it.

Why this is Open and not Verified. The tempting move was to caption it "Tom Waits" and let a reader assume he wrote what he said. That is this site's characteristic failure in miniature: an attribution that is true about the speaking and silent about the writing, left to be read as a claim about both.

Two sentences on the Miranda sheet claim a little more than their source does Link to this section

On: the-tempest.html, second paragraph. Found: 2026-09-08, while verifying the draft. Left as sent — fixing either means changing Helen's words, which is not this session's call.

Neither is an invented source. Both are the failure CLAUDE.md names as this site's characteristic one: a source tightened rather than fabricated, with the attribution left attached.

1. "the first recorded use of it as a person's name in English (Wikipedia contributors, n.d.)"

The cited article) says Shakespeare "originated use of the name as a forename", and says in the same breath that Miranda existed as a surname before him. A surname is a person's name. So the sheet's sentence is a step wider than the source it credits, and the source contains the counter-example.

The narrower claim — that Shakespeare coined it as a given name — is what Wikipedia supports and is the interesting claim anyway. Suggested fix, for Helen and Ryan: "the first recorded use of it as a given name in English." One word, and the citation becomes true.

2. "He built it from the Latin gerundive of mirari, to wonder at"

The gerundive derivation is correct Latin — mirandus, -a, -um is the gerundive of mirari, and "she who is to be wondered at" is a fair rendering of it. It is simply not in the cited source: Wikipedia says only "from the Latin word mirandus" and never mentions the gerundive or mirari. So the Latin is ours, and it is standing inside a sentence that reads as Wikipedia's. It wants either a Latin dictionary behind it or a sentence break that puts the citation on the half it actually covers.

Why this is worth an entry rather than a quiet edit. The sheet's title turns on this etymology — To Be Wondered With is a one-preposition move on to be wondered at — so the gerundive is not a decorative aside, it is the load-bearing claim of the whole sheet, and it is the one claim on the page with nothing verified under it.

The wrong violet is mounted on the flower codes sheet Link to this section

On: flower-codes.html, first plate. Found: 2026-09-08, while choosing the plates. Mounted anyway, with the problem in the caption.

The violet the sheet is about is the Mediterranean sweet violet, Viola odorata. The plate mounted is Viola pedata, the American birdfoot violet, photographed for a New York state museum survey in 1918. It was the public-domain violet plate to hand.

The caption carries the correction — "This is not Sappho's violet… The plant is the genus, not the poem" — so nothing on the page claims otherwise, and a note at the foot of the sheet asks readers for a better plate. The fix is one line of markup and a new caption the day a public-domain Viola odorata plate turns up. Until then this is the only object on the site standing in for a different object, and it is doing so out loud.