A practical guide to manual source attribution review in TEMIRIN using configured records, explicit market identity, current controls, and human review.
August 3, 2026 · 4 min read
A defensible Polymarket source-attribution workflow begins before anyone reads the headline. Each RSS feed, HTTPS web page, or provider-configured Telegram or X reader needs a clear workspace label, canonical origin where available, owner, and collection state. TEMIRIN stores source records and deterministic brief context; it does not transform an unknown social post into a verified primary source merely because collection succeeded.
Distinguish the publisher, the account or feed that distributed the item, and the underlying authority cited by it. A repost may be useful for discovery while the linked filing, agency release, court document, or official result carries stronger provenance. Save the canonical reference and observation time that were actually available. Do not copy credentials, private channel content, or unnecessary personal information into the research record.
A source record belongs beside a Polymarket opportunity only when the workflow carries a supported explicit market identifier. Verify that identifier against the exact market question, outcome, date, and resolution terms. Evidence without an explicit link remains searchable and reviewable in its source context, while opportunity records continue to come from markets the workspace intentionally placed on its watchlist.
When adding the link, verify the exact question, outcome, close time, and resolution source on the venue. One article may apply to several markets, and several records may support or complicate one market; preserve each relationship explicitly. A human note records whether the reviewer sees support, conflict, or unresolved context without changing the source record itself.
Record observed time separately from a publisher's available publication or event time. An edited page may show a new statement at the same URL, and a social post can be deleted after collection. Keep enough safe metadata to explain what was reviewed, but direct the user to the canonical page for full context. If an update materially changes the evidence, append a new record or version rather than silently rewriting the earlier decision input.
Use quotations sparingly and with clear attribution. A short excerpt may anchor the relevant clause, while the review note should paraphrase the conclusion and preserve uncertainty. Resolution wording deserves its own direct check because a news source and a market's formal resolving authority answer different questions. Attribution quality improves when the workspace makes these layers visible instead of presenting every URL as equivalent proof.
Canonicalization and deduplication can keep syndicated copies from overwhelming the review queue, but they should not erase the path by which an item arrived. Retain safe ingestion status and source identity so an operator can understand repeated records. When a fetch, parse, or provider authorization fails, show that operational state. A failed reader is not evidence that no relevant event occurred.
Disagreement requires more than counting URLs. Several articles may repeat one original claim, while one primary document may outweigh many summaries. TEMIRIN does not calculate source independence or resolve conflicts automatically. Reviewers should trace claims back to their origins, note shared dependence, and record why uncertainty remains. If a source correction appears later, append it to the timeline and avoid rewriting the earlier note with hindsight.
Sample a complete record and follow its source ID, explicit market link, watchlist opportunity, trigger and current price context, alert event, authenticated decision, and any separate paper order. An outbound email, Telegram, Slack, or webhook message may summarize the source and link back to the application, while its delivery ledger records transport attempts. The message must not become an approval command or a new configured source.
Exports should carry canonical source references, timestamps, explicit market IDs, and attributable decision notes without leaking credentials or unnecessary sensitive context. Test an unlinked item, a duplicate, a corrected page, and a failed fetch beside the successful case. A strong attribution workflow lets another reviewer reconstruct what was known and why it was connected, while leaving outcome interpretation, real capital, and every venue transaction with the user.
End the audit by asking a second reviewer to reproduce one conclusion from the stored chain without verbal guidance. They should find the collected source, canonical authority, explicit market relationship, contemporaneous prices, and human interpretation while seeing every missing field. Any step that depends on thematic guesswork should remain unlinked or be documented as human judgment rather than backfilled as system-generated attribution.
No. Evidence links require explicit market identifiers, and opportunity records derive from configured watchlist markets. Similar wording alone does not create a relationship.
Retain the collected source path, identify the distributor, and follow the claim to its earliest reliable or primary authority when available. Do not treat repeated copies as independent confirmation.
No. Delivery status records outbound transport. Evidence provenance, an authenticated in-app decision, and any paper order remain separate records.
