Skip to content
NYPTID Info

Editorial policy

An encyclopedia that shows its work

NYPTID Info is written by AI models and checked by other AI models, claim by claim. Every verdict is published next to the article, so you never have to take our word for anything.

What NYPTID Info is

NYPTID Info is a free, general-purpose encyclopedia. Articles are written on request: search for a topic, and if no article exists, one is researched, written and fact-checked while you wait. It takes a few minutes.

We publish how each article was made, not just the result. Every article carries a ledger listing each factual claim, what both fact-checkers said about it, and what happened to it. The method below is the one the code runs; the model names are read from the same configuration the pipeline uses.

How an article is made

  1. Research

    Grok 4.7 and GPT-6.1 Sol

    Two engines search the open web independently, so neither one's search habits decide alone what the article is built from. Wikipedia is read directly and, when it covers the topic, becomes one numbered source among many. An article needs at least two sources to go ahead.

  2. Writing

    Claude Opus 5.5

    The writer sees only the numbered sources. Every sentence that states a fact must end with a citation to one of them. Alongside the text it lists every checkable claim it made, restated as a standalone sentence, so each one can be tested.

  3. Fact-checking

    GPT-6.1 Sol and Grok 4.7

    Two independent checkers judge every claim against the sources: supported, contradicted, or unsupported. They work in parallel and never see each other's answers. If both checkers turn out to be the same model, the article is not published.

  4. Neutrality audit

    GPT-6 Astra

    The draft is read as a reader from the left, the right, a religious believer, a secular reader and someone outside the West would read it. Loaded wording is quoted with a neutral alternative, and significant viewpoints that are missing are named.

  5. Arbitration

    Claude Sonnet 5.5

    The arbiter applies the decision rule below to every claim, fixes the neutrality flags it agrees with, and adds omitted viewpoints only where the sources support them. It may not add facts that are not in the sources.

  6. Scripture and publication

    Claude Sonnet 5.5, then the King James Version itself

    A model proposes Bible references that bear directly on the subject, or none. The verse text is then fetched from the KJV; a reference that does not resolve is dropped. The article is published with its full claim ledger, its sources and the names of the models that did each job.

If a model is unavailable, Grok 4.6 can stand in. Each article records the models that worked on it.

The decision rule

A claim's fate is decided by code, not by a model's judgement call. A checker that fails to answer about a claim counts as not supporting it.

Verified
Both checkers support the claim. It stays in the article.
Disputed
One checker supports it; the other does not. It is published only with attribution, saying who claims it and that it could not be confirmed.
Removed
Neither checker supports it. It is cut before publication. It stays visible in the ledger, so you can see what was stopped.

The editorial rules

Every writer, checker and arbiter receives these rules word for word.

  1. Write only what the numbered sources support. Every sentence that states a fact ends with one or more citation markers like [2] or [1][4]. Never cite a number that is not in the source list. Never invent a source, quote, figure or date, and never describe a source ("a 2020 review", "a Harvard study") with details its excerpt does not show.
  2. Where sources disagree, say so plainly and attribute each position to who holds it. Do not pick a winner the evidence does not pick.
  3. Present every significant viewpoint fairly, in terms its own holders would accept. No loaded adjectives, no sneer quotes, no moralising in factual sections.
  4. No outlet, agency or encyclopedia is treated as authoritative by default, including Wikipedia. Prefer primary sources, official data and peer-reviewed research, and say when something rests on a single source.
  5. Plain, precise encyclopedic English. Short paragraphs. No filler, no hype, no first person.

Scripture

NYPTID Info holds the Bible as its moral reference. Where Scripture speaks to a subject, the article ends with the relevant passages, quoted from the King James Version. The verse text is fetched from the text itself, never written by a model. The factual sections present every significant view fairly, in terms its own holders would accept.

Sources and licence

Every article lists its numbered sources with links, and each citation marker points to one of them. No outlet, agency or encyclopedia is treated as authoritative by default — including Wikipedia, which is one source among several, never the only one.

Article text is published under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 licence (CC BY-SA 4.0). Where an article draws on Wikipedia, that article is listed as a source and attributed, as its licence requires. You may reuse our text on the same terms: credit NYPTID Info, link the article, and share alike. The King James Version is in the public domain.

Corrections

Every article has a Report button. Tell us what is wrong — a factual error, slanted wording, something missing or out of date — and, if you can, link a source.

Reports are checked against the sources. When one holds up, the article is corrected and a new revision is published; earlier revisions are kept. The number of reports received is shown on the accuracy page.

What NYPTID Info is not

  • Not a forum. There are no comments or user edits. Reports go to the editors, not onto the page.
  • Not ad-funded. There are no ads, and your attention is not for sale. The work is paid for by reader donations.
  • Not infallible. Models make mistakes and so do sources. The ledger exists so you can see where the evidence is thin. Check anything important against the cited sources.
  • Not professional advice. Articles on health, law or money describe a subject; they do not replace someone qualified who knows your situation.