Article Revision

Revise an existing article using new input from one or more other sources. Revise structure and flow first, integrate the new material so it reads as one voice, and leave the user a clear record of what changed and why.

Use this when an article already exists and new material (research, notes, a clipping, an interview, a collaborator's edits) needs to be folded in. To write from scratch use write-article; to score an article without changing it use write-review.

CRITICAL: Require "what" and "why" before revising

• What: the new source material (text, file path, or URL) and, if the user has an opinion, which ideas from it should land.
• Why: what the revised article should do that the current one doesn't (e.g. "add concrete evidence so the rebuttal lands", "acknowledge the strongest counterargument without giving up the thesis").

If either is missing or vague, ask once for both in one message and wait. Don't guess the intent and don't dump the new content in.

Rules that override everything below

Provenance: never invent

New material may contain only what the sources or the original article contain. That includes numbers you compute: write "since 2000", not "over 25 years" worked out from today's date. Never invent an author, URL, number, date, quote, member count, study, or first-person experience. When a source is missing something the prose wants: