Outcome: Five entries received claim-level source checks, targeted revisions, and independent read-only post-edit review. All five are now marked source_checked for the claims and scope recorded in the accompanying evidence ledger. This does not mean the philosophical conclusions are settled, that every primary work was read in full, or that the entries received human expert review.
The approved source-review standard proved workable for this bounded normal-risk batch. Claim-level records exposed concrete attribution, scope, and qualification issues; independent post-edit checks caught one remaining Twin Earth caveat and a Hume section-title/URL mismatch. Both were corrected and checked again.
Recommendation: continue with risk-ranked, bounded batches rather than scaling immediately across the 49 expansion entries not yet audited. These two batches cover eight of the original 57 expansion entries, which is enough to support the standard’s use in small batches but not to establish that a full-scale audit will preserve the same quality or throughput.
The repository validator and all 18 unit tests pass. A separate check found that each of the five articles’ Further Reading URLs exactly matches its dataset references, and git diff --check is clean. The validator checks URL syntax, not whether every external page is currently available.
This batch remains local, uncommitted, and unpushed. The first high-risk batch was pushed separately to its feature branch under prior approval; no merge to main, release, or deployment is part of this work.