Two new levers on a sin page. `wild[]` renders credited, linked
specimens between the explanation and the citations — first the
argument, then proof people actually publish this, then the sources.
`related[]` cross-links neighbouring sins and is resolved at build, so a
typo fails the build instead of shipping a dead link.
Both arrive with the first specimen: a Hungarian primary graphic whose
three slices read 38/22/19 — 79% — drawn as a full circle, so every
share is inflated by about 1.27x. Measured off the image, the 38% slice
occupies 173.6 degrees, or 48.3% of the pie.
Our published pie sin is about too many slices, so it didn't cover this;
"Pie Slices That Don't Sum to the Whole" is a new severity-5 page whose
before/after is two pies differing only in whether the remainder is
present. That sin is an omission, so `compareNote` replaces the standard
"same numbers, both charts" line.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01ULE5RRxdQE1ebwefEd2eCM
The note said the github-pages environment allows deploys only from the
default branch, so switching the default to main should have fixed it.
It didn't — the deploy failed identically, with the annotation "Branch
main is not allowed to deploy to github-pages due to environment
protection rules."
The allow-list is pinned on the environment at creation time and does
not follow the default branch. The fix is in Settings → Environments,
and nothing in the workflow or the branch settings substitutes for it.
Also records that a zero-step deploy failure is always a rejected job
rather than a broken build, and that the environments API is blocked by
the agent proxy so this needs a human.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01ULE5RRxdQE1ebwefEd2eCM
Datawrapper's blog 403s, Medium is unreachable, JSTOR wants a session,
and a search snippet is a paraphrase rather than a source's words. The
failure mode is guessing, or silently writing a weaker page.
docs/source-requests.md now holds a fetch queue with the specific
question each link needs to answer, plus a register of claims already
live on the site that rest on recall rather than a page anyone opened —
starting with the riskiest, an inference about which mistakes the
Economist piece owns up to. docs/sources/ is the drop zone.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01ULE5RRxdQE1ebwefEd2eCM
The pie page argued the form was the problem ("asks the reader to
compare angles") and then conceded a narrow exception; the dual-axis
page named the form in its title and rated it severity 5. Both read as
blanket bans, which is not the position — and blanket bans are how
dataviz advice turns into the folklore we're trying to replace with
citations.
The pie page now says outright that the chart type isn't the sin, the
workload is, and keeps the pie for the job it does well. The dual-axis
page is retitled for the actual misuse, drops to severity 4, and gains
a section on when a second axis is legitimate — the test being whether
you chose the alignment yourself.
Adds a severity rubric to CLAUDE.md so this stays consistent: 5 is
reserved for charts with no honest reading, and a form with legitimate
uses caps at 4.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01ULE5RRxdQE1ebwefEd2eCM
"Canon" was leaking onto the public site — a nav item, a footer block, a
page title, a set of CSS class names. It was also driving content
decisions it had no business driving: the backlog was ordered around
which references were still unused, which is curation dressed up as
planning.
The page is now /references/, the list is documented as a bibliography
to grow rather than a canon to curate, and the backlog says plainly that
a sin earns a slot by being worth a page — sources are found to support
it, never the reverse.
Adds six sources (Cairo's Truthful Art, Few's Show Me the Numbers, the
Economist's audit of its own charts, Kosara's eagereyes, WTF
Visualizations, Datawrapper's dual-axis piece) and roughly doubles the
citations on the five published sins, to 5-7 each. Two of the new notes
point at sources that complicate our own position rather than back it.
The Economist essay ships without a URL rather than a guessed one.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01ULE5RRxdQE1ebwefEd2eCM
Titles are scanned in the gallery and recognized in a link, so they
should say what the sin is rather than pun about it. Retitles the three
published sins and the backlog's working titles, and records the rule in
CLAUDE.md: the title names the problem, the poke carries the voice.
Filenames are untouched, so existing URLs still resolve.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01ULE5RRxdQE1ebwefEd2eCM
Capture the tacit decisions from this session so they survive: the
product thesis, voice/poke rules, the same-data proof rule, how to add a
sin, design/rendering conventions, OG-card satori gotchas, and the
deploy default-branch gotcha.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01XPEvmMbac2fCvKXpQcovj8
Claude