How the wire works

1. We listen

The system checks approved sources for concrete, potentially newsworthy claims. Activity, popularity and repetition alone do not make a story.

2. We separate claims

A candidate is broken into specific statements. Links supplied by the source are retained; independent origins are distinguished from pages repeating the same account.

3. We check

Evidence is assessed for authority, proximity and accountability. A named official source carries different weight from second-hand community reporting, even when both are worth reading.

4. We label

• Official: supported by authoritative first-party evidence.
• Confirmed: supported by accountable, named reporting.
• Strong signal: meaningful evidence points in one direction.
• Developing: relevant evidence exists, but the picture is moving.
• Unconfirmed: newsworthy enough to track, not independently established.
• Contradicted or debunked: material evidence pushes against the claim.

5. We show our work

Each report exposes its source count, current status, claim ledger and linked evidence. The count represents independent origin groups—not raw link volume.

6. We update

Material corrections create a new version and visible history. Removal or redaction does not silently erase the underlying audit record.

The 2027 tour meter

Once a week, we review approved forum signals, a bounded web search and the published Glimmer Wire archive for evidence that bears on 2027 live dates. A model may classify candidate evidence, but it cannot choose the percentage. Fixed weights reward direct intent, planning, bookings and logistics; constraints and denials pull the reading down. Repetition counts once, weak sources are capped, and the history remains visible in the calculation. The result is an editorial estimate—not an announcement or betting market.