Bibliographer

Bibliographer Skill — Reference & Fact Checking

Pi port: This project-local Pi skill is based on .claude/skills/bibliographer/SKILL.md, but runs from .pi/skills/bibliographer/SKILL.md. When using it in Pi, read this .pi file and do not edit or depend on the .claude skill.

Given a compiled exegetical analysis (a file path, or a passage reference to resolve via the standard content/Books/... path rules), verify its checkable claims against primary sources, correct or hedge what fails, and compile its ## Sources section.

This skill enforces the project's core posture: verify claims, cross-check sources, and preserve only what survives scrutiny. It performs no fresh exegesis — it audits what the analysis already says.

Verification Checklist

Work through the document section by section. In Pi, verify from actual sources using whatever source-access tools are available in the session: first read RESOURCES.md, then use bash with curl/Python/PowerShell, browser or search extensions if loaded, local source files/databases, or an underrow/MCP service if one is available. Do not treat model memory as verification. If a claim cannot be checked against a source, hedge it, remove it, or flag it for human review according to the action rules below.

1. Strong's numbers — every H####/G#### maps to the lemma actually named beside it, and the gloss given falls within the lexicon's semantic range.
2. Original-language forms — the script, the transliteration, and the English term in each **term** (Hebrew/Greek/Aramaic: script, *transliteration*) triple all agree.
3. Cross-references — every cited Book Chapter:Verse exists and says what the analysis claims it says. Flag citations that exist but do not support the point.
4. Quotations and named authorities — quoted scholars, ancient sources (Josephus, Talmud, ANE texts), and archaeological claims are verified against a source, or downgraded ("some scholars suggest"), or removed.
5. Dates and numbers — dates are internally consistent with the document's own timeline tables and with standard chronology; word counts and occurrence counts claimed in the text are spot-checked.
6. Scripture quotations — phrases quoted from the passage match the translation named in the attribution line.

Action Rules

• Mechanical errors (a wrong Strong's digit, a transliteration typo, a miscited chapter): fix in place.
• Unverifiable specifics: hedge or delete. A specific claim (a name, a date, a quotation, a statistic) that cannot be verified must not remain stated as fact.
• Conflicts between sections (e.g., two sections give different composition dates): keep the better-evidenced position and note the alternative in one clause; never let the document silently disagree with itself.
• Log every change you make.

Output

1. The corrected document — edit the file in place. Preserve its structure exactly: do not add, remove, renumber, or reorder sections; do not touch prose that passed verification.
2. ## Sources — append as the final section (after ## Application, preceded by ---): a per-discipline list (### Historical & Cultural / ### Linguistic / ### Literary / ### Theological / ### Hermeneutical / ### Application — one bucket per document section, omit a bucket only if truly empty) of the works and sites actually consulted during verification or genuinely relied on by the analysis. Never pad with unconsulted works; an invented citation is worse than none.
3. Verification report (returned, not written into the document): counts of claims checked, corrected, hedged, and removed, plus any unresolved flags a human should review.

Formatting

• Original-language terms: **term** (Hebrew/Greek/Aramaic: script, *transliteration*)
• Strong's numbers: H1234 / G5678
• Biblical citations: Book Chapter:Verses
• ## Sources entries: author/site, work, and (for web sources) the specific page consulted