Source Policy
Data sources and evidence hierarchy
How we label astronomical data, public birth records, interpretive references, and unresolved provenance.A source is useful only when readers can tell what claim it supports. AstroMaster does not treat all links, biographies, or AI-generated summaries as equally reliable.Last updated · 2026-08-24Source hierarchy
We prefer primary records and reproducible data, then specialist reference works, then reputable secondary summaries. A lower-level source does not become stronger merely because many pages repeat it.
- Primary: official records, original publications, direct statements, and reproducible astronomical data.
- Specialist: established databases and reference works with visible methodology.
- Secondary: reputable biographies or reporting that identify their own sources.
- Unverified: unsourced social posts, copied tables, anonymous claims, or generated summaries without provenance.
Celebrity birth data
When available, celebrity profiles show a Rodden Rating or equivalent provenance note so the reader can distinguish a documented time from a reported or speculative time.
- A precise-looking time is not automatically a reliable time.
- If sources conflict, the profile should show the conflict instead of silently choosing the most convenient value.
- A corrected record updates the profile and its revision date.
Editorial and AI-assisted content
AI assistance is not cited as evidence. Factual claims still require a traceable source or a reproducible calculation, and interpretive claims must be presented as interpretation.
- Generated wording is reviewed for invented facts, false precision, and absolute predictions.
- A source list should identify the role of each source rather than decorate the page.
- When verification is incomplete, we say so and narrow the claim.
External references
- Astro-Databank Rodden RatingsExplanation of birth-data reliability categories.
- IANA Time Zone DatabaseHistorical time-zone reference.