For the editors of Wikipedia's articles on this story

What this site is, in Wikipedia's terms

A self-published source (WP:SPS), written largely by language models (WP:RSML): not a reliable source for an article, and it does not ask to be cited or linked. Its value to an editor is different: it keeps the primary record. Every page it cites is captured into an evidence vault with a time and a hash, so a page that has since been edited or removed can be read as it was when the article's reference was written; every number has a date; every disagreement between sources is a row in a contradiction ledger with both sides quoted; its own errors are corrected on a corrections page, never silently.

What it offers

• Captures of the pages the article cites. Every reference of the article is matched to a capture where this site holds one; each capture has a UTC time and a SHA-256 hash, and the text as fetched. Where a cited page has changed since the citation was written, the capture shows the wording the citing editor saw. (The archive an article should link is the Wayback Machine, not this site; the captures are for checking, not citing.)
• A reading of the article against the evidence. A reviewer's reading: findings against the article's own policies, with the captures, and a proposed change in the shape an edit request takes. Written by a model, so by Wikipedia's rule it is material for a person to check and put in their own words, never pasted.
• Answers to questions asked on the talk page, from the same captures, on the same page.
• A timeline in UTC of the disclosure, the leak, the release and the responses, with each time's source: the timeline.
• Drawings built by code from the published diff of the fix, under CC BY 4.0, for the diagram the talk page asks for; any upload is a human contributor's, under Wikipedia's own rules on images.

The rules this site holds itself to

1. No agent of this site edits Wikipedia, any article, any talk page, any item on Wikidata. Its software reads; it never writes.
2. No edit request, comment or text written by a model is posted, by anyone, on this site's behalf. Where the human editor of this site posts on a talk page, it is in his own words, signed, with his connection to this site disclosed (WP:COI, WP:DISCLOSE), in the edit-request form (WP:EDITREQ), citing independent sources only.
3. No request to cite or link this site. This site is not a reliable source for Wikipedia and does not ask to be one (WP:SPS, WP:ADV). If an editor finds a capture useful, the thing to cite is the captured page, with the Wayback Machine as its archive.
4. What it takes, it attributes. The article's text is republished here under CC BY-SA 4.0, with the revision id as the attribution; the pages and data that carry it are under the same licence, and what was changed (parsed into sentences, classed by wording) is stated on each page.
5. Corrections first. Where the article shows this site to be wrong, this site's page is corrected first, and the correction is dated and kept.
6. It reads the talk page. Every four hours. A question asked there about the facts of the story is answered on this site's review page from the captures, where a person can read it; it is not answered on the talk page by an agent.

How the two could work together

Wikipedia's strength is review by many people against written policy; this site's is a dated, hashed record of the primary pages and every change in them. The join is the evidence. An editor who wants to check a citation can read the capture; a reviewer who wants to know whether a figure was ever stated by its source can read the fact-check desk's grade and the excerpt it rests on; a contributor who wants the sequence of a day in UTC can take it from the timeline, with its sources. Nothing of this needs the article to mention this site. The one thing this site asks is that an editor who finds an error here say so, on the talk page or by the means on its feedback page, so it can be corrected.

The articles read