JSP SHRARA — Our proposed encyclopaedia and knowledge search engine

An independent alternative to encyclopaedias such as Wikipedia. JSP SHRARA is developing its own knowledge environment to explore topics, scrutinise specific statements and place primary sources alongside different versions of an account. We are neither affiliated with nor endorsed by Wikipedia or the Wikimedia Foundation.

What exists now? This encyclopaedia page, initial separate source entries and our public sample library are online. Our own complete search engine, automatic comparison of Wikipedia page versions, worldwide coverage and direct DAM-DMA integration are still in development. A results list or AI answer must never be presented as fully verified unless the underlying checking has actually been carried out.

Explore the available material: browse the sample-topic library, open the Moon entry or malaria entry, and review our dated source and claim records. This is a manually navigable starter library, not a fully functional search engine.

Every topic deserves a good question

Our ambition is to make the fields of knowledge explored through Wikipedia and specialised reference works accessible, connected and open to deeper examination. A large collection of topics is not, by itself, a collection of proven truths.

Three layers for each topic

1. Simple explanation. What is this topic about? Which terms does a beginner need? What is known at a broad level?

2. Verifiable depth. Which primary texts, scientific studies or dependable records support the specific statements? Are there alternative interpretations?

3. Research dossier. When was this topic last examined? What remains uncertain or disputed? Where can people find primary sources and corrections?

What about Wikipedia?

Where licences permit, material can be reused with proper attribution and compliance with the applicable licence. Reuse does not automatically make material factually verified. Popular, frequently cited and official sources can also contain errors.

Example topic: framing

Framing is the way an issue is presented so that some aspects become more salient. The presence of framing does not, by itself, prove manipulation, a lie or a change in voting behaviour. Those stronger claims require separate evidence.

Current status

The content architecture remains in development. This page does not yet provide a complete encyclopaedia or verified coverage of all topics.

Initial source examples

We have created a sample library containing separate dossiers. The Moon entry refers to NASA, and the malaria entry refers to the WHO. Both make their source status and limitations explicit. Describing an external source is not equivalent to completing an independent SHRARA assessment.

DAM-DMA: the proposed research assistant behind SHRARA

DAM-DMA is intended to break a future SHRARA search question down into testable statements, compare primary sources, identify changes between source versions, find counter-evidence and present its reasoning in accessible language. Users must remain able to follow source links, challenge conclusions and identify analytical shortcomings. DAM-DMA is not currently connected to this page as an operational production search or fact-checking engine.

How we intend to check statements on Wikipedia or another website

  1. Capture the exact claim. Record the page URL, date accessed, relevant text, context and, where possible, a specific revision.
  2. Return to the primary sources. A footnote, newspaper or press release may be incorrect, outdated, decontextualised or copied from another publication.
  3. Assess the evidential value. Does the source support precisely this claim, only part of it, or something else entirely? Are different sources genuinely independent?
  4. Actively seek contrary evidence. Compare counter-evidence, later corrections, specialist literature, primary records and limits of what can be established.
  5. Label the conclusion accurately. Possible classifications include supported within scope, partially supported, incorrect, outdated, disputed, insufficient evidence or not yet examined.
  6. Show the history. Support assessments with evidence, publish valid objections, record corrections and make later modifications traceable.

An error is not automatically a lie. An inaccurate passage may result from mistakes, outdated information, poor sourcing or deliberate deception. A stronger allegation about intent requires evidence that supports the allegation itself. We must apply the same test to our own text and any future DAM-DMA output.

What a future search should display

Alongside a simple answer, we intend to present source links, dates and versions, original quotations when lawful, facts distinguished from interpretations, relevant disputes, limits of evidence and correction records. People should never have to choose between blindly trusting Wikipedia and blindly trusting SHRARA.

Our name and responsibilities

Our service's own name and design are JSP SHRARA, not Wikipedia. References to Wikipedia identify external sources or demonstrably checked claims; they do not indicate endorsement. Reusing text or images always depends on copyright and specific licensing conditions. There will be no bulk import without checking the relevant rights.

How we structure an entry · Evidence records and source provenance · Corrections and objections · Technical development status.