Governance and Research Standards
ccwv.life is published by a not-for-profit Christian ministry. Its purpose is the explanation and defense of the Christian faith and the accurate presentation of the world's religious traditions, in the service of Christian unity. This page states how the site is governed and the standards its research, investigation, and reporting are held to, so that any reader can judge the work for themselves.
Governance
The site is directed by its founder and editor, James Beine. Research and the accuracy audit are carried by the research editor, Red. Development is carried by Qubit Cole, Senior Developer. The Christian Assessment panels are governed separately: their criteria are published on the Assessment criteria page, and their verdicts belong to the named theological reviewers listed there, not to the site's editors or developers.
Decisions about what the site publishes are made inside this structure and recorded in the project's own records. Nothing on the site is published anonymously: every work carries an author and a reviewer.
The Citation Rule
Every work published on this site carries cited references. This is a governing rule, and a work that does not meet it does not publish.
- Every factual claim in a work is traceable to a named source, cited in the work itself.
- Primary sources and secondary sources are distinguished and cited as what they are.
- Where a question is disputed, the work presents the positions in dispute, each with its own sources. The site reports the dispute; it does not settle it by silence.
- Where the record is thin, the work says so plainly instead of filling the gap.
- A citation names the work relied on; its author, its title, and where a reader can find it; never a bare assertion that a source exists.
Research Standards
- Provenance: every fact on the site carries its source, its confidence, and the date it was recorded.
- Temporal validity: records describe what was the case at a stated time. History is never overwritten; a superseded record is preserved and marked as superseded.
- No hard deletion: a withdrawn work is marked withdrawn, with the reason recorded.
- Internal diversity: no tradition is presented as a monolith. Branches, schools, and movements are recorded as distinct entities, and contested placements are shown as contested, with both positions sourced.
- Self-description first: how a body describes itself is recorded separately from how others classify it, and the two are never merged.
- Comparison without verdict: the site's comparison instrument sets traditions side by side on the same questions. It does not score, rank, or judge them.
- Sensitivity: living communities are described in the terms they use for themselves wherever the record allows, and contested descriptions are flagged as contested.
Investigation and Reporting Standards
- A claim about a living organization or person rests first on that body's own publications, then on independent scholarship and reporting, in that order.
- A body or person described on the site may send a correction at any time. A correction that checks against the sources is made, and the change is recorded.
- Reporting distinguishes what a source states from what the site concludes, and says which is which.
The Accuracy Audit
Published works are audited for accuracy and citation on a continuing basis by the research editor. A work that fails the audit; a claim without a source, a citation that does not support the claim, a disputed question presented as settled; is corrected, or withdrawn to draft until it meets the standard. The audit's findings are recorded with the work itself.
Corrections
Errors brought to the site's attention are checked against the sources and corrected when the check supports the correction. Corrections are recorded with the date and the reason, in the open, as part of the work's own history.