Why Registry Artwork Is Not Evidence

Editorial purpose

The site uses locally hosted illustrations to make categories and record pages understandable, visually coherent, and usable without depending on third-party image servers. Some visuals are created or refined with generative tools. Their purpose is editorial presentation, not authentication.

A visitor should be able to recognise the subject of a page quickly, but the visual should never be mistaken for a photograph of the actual event or object unless the page explicitly says so.

Evidence remains source-linked

The evidence basis is the cited research, reporting, institutional material, measurement documents, and audit reasoning displayed on each record page. Source links are separated from the illustration and presented in an evidence panel.

A polished image does not increase an evidence grade. Equally, an unattractive or missing historical photograph does not weaken a reliable scientific paper or official archive. Visual quality and evidentiary quality are assessed independently.

No visual substitution

An illustration must not be described as original event photography, laboratory evidence, a measurement image, or a witness document. Record pages display an editorial-illustration disclosure, and related cards use alt text that describes the image as an illustration.

Where documentary imagery is used in the future, it should be licensed, attributed, dated, and labelled separately. The source and usage rights should be preserved so that the image can be distinguished from promotional or reconstructed material.

Avoid invented factual detail

Illustrations should not introduce details that are then repeated as facts. Clothing, venue layouts, product packaging, crowd size, equipment, dimensions, and branding may be stylised unless they are drawn directly from verified source material.

For that reason, factual captions come from the structured record page rather than from the image itself. The page’s metric, holder, date, and location must be supported by sources even if the visual is only symbolic.

Accessibility and performance

Locally hosted artwork is compressed into WebP format and sized for responsive delivery. Meaningful images receive descriptive alt text; decorative logos and repeated branding use empty alt text so screen readers are not forced to hear duplicate information.

The site avoids autoplaying video, animated evidence imagery, and remote embeds. This improves loading time, reduces tracking exposure, and makes the registry more usable on mobile connections.

Corrections and replacement

If an illustration is misleading, inappropriate, or too close to a real person, brand, event, or protected work, it can be replaced without changing the underlying registry entry. A visual correction does not alter the evidence decision unless the image itself had been cited as evidence.

Visitors can report a visual concern through the contact or corrections process, including concerns about misleading scale, branding, attribution, or resemblance. The page ID, affected image, and a clear description of the issue are sufficient to begin a documented editorial review.

Brand consistency without factual contamination

The visual system uses a consistent teal, black, gold, and ivory palette so readers can recognise the registry across pages. Consistency is a design function, not a factual claim. A medal, trophy, globe, cannabis leaf, event crowd, or product scene may be symbolic even when it resembles the subject of the article.\n\nFor that reason, visual assets are not used to infer dates, measurements, participants, venue details, packaging, or ownership. Those details come only from the structured dataset and cited source material.

Future documentary image standards

If original documentary photography is added later, the site should preserve the photographer or source, usage permission, capture date where known, caption, alt text, and whether the image has been cropped or edited. Documentary images should be visually distinguished from editorial illustration.\n\nA record holder may provide images for publication, but submission does not automatically make them independent evidence. The editorial team must still evaluate provenance, metadata, continuity, and whether the image supports the particular fact being claimed.