# External Feedback Finding

Copy this template for one independently dispositionable finding. Do not store
private contact information, confidential disclosures, or identifiable
pastoral case data in the repository.

## Identity

- Finding ID: `FB-V1-YYYY-NNN`
- Status: received / triaged / investigating / decision recorded / implementing
  / verifying / closed / reopened
- Date received:
- Portfolio version: `V1`
- Exact full manuscript or artifact commit:
- Book or collection:
- Language:
- Format:
- Semantic location:
- Page or line aid, if useful:
- DDF Claim ID or named route:
- Public URL, if applicable:
- Primary category:
- Secondary categories:
- Priority: P0 / P1 / P2 / P3

## Reviewer Context

- Reviewer reference:
- Role:
- Relevant competence, qualification, or lived contact:
- Tradition, jurisdiction, discipline, or locale where relevant:
- Prior involvement or conflict of interest:
- Attribution permission: named / anonymous / private
- Quotation permission: yes / no
- Edited-summary permission: yes / no
- Follow-up permission: yes / no

Keep contact details outside Git in the approved private system.

## Finding

### One-Sentence Finding

[State the alleged defect or opportunity precisely.]

### Current Text Or Behavior

[Quote only the minimum necessary text or describe the artifact behavior.]

### Why It Matters

[Name the doctrinal, evidential, pastoral, safety, reader, localization,
accessibility, rights, or production consequence.]

### Evidence And Reasoning

[Provide primary sources, original-language analysis, domain evidence, reader
observations, counterexamples, or other reasons.]

### Strongest Version Of The Finding

[State the challenge fairly enough that its author could recognize it.]

### Proposed Correction

[Give suggested wording, removal, source, test, guardrail, or next action if
available.]

## Investigation

- Intake owner:
- Specialist review needed:
- Primary sources checked:
- Original-language work:
- Relevant DDF coverage:
- Serious rival interpretation:
- Contrary or negative cases:
- Field or reader consequence:
- Duplicate or related finding IDs:
- DDF coverage request required: yes / no
- Coverage request ID, if any:

### Investigation Notes

[Record what the evidence establishes, what remains uncertain, and which source
or discipline has direct jurisdiction.]

## Decision

- Disposition: accepted / accepted with modification / duplicate / deferred /
  declined / out of scope / withdrawn
- Decided by:
- Decision date:
- Rationale:
- Deferred dependency and reconsideration condition:
- Residual risk:
- Release-blocking: yes / no

The rationale must answer the strongest version of the finding. Do not use
model agreement, reviewer status, or authorial preference as the reason.

## Impact And Implementation

- Affected books:
- Affected languages:
- Affected resources:
- Affected short forms:
- Affected research records and public pages:
- Required correction notice:
- Implementation owner:
- Implementation commit:
- Verification commit:
- Tests, builds, or human checks:
- Reviewer follow-up sent:

## Closure

- Closed by:
- Closure date:
- Closure reason:
- Reopen condition: