Neville tells how he got his name: when he was three weeks old his mother heard a voice say 'Call him Neville', and fifteen minutes later his uncle told her the same thing, though the name had never been used in the family before.
Date (happened)
-
No date
relative
Reasoning
The passage explicitly dates receipt of the name to three weeks after birth but supplies no calendar year, so the exact relation remains undated.
Told / reported
4 October 1966
estimated
Why
Lane L7 (#2354) re-derivation. Supersedes in substance, not in storage, the refuted-date told claim(s) on this event; those rows stand per append-only.
Reasoning
Re-derived, not walked down. The existing told claim(s) on this event took their date from a delivery claim on node 1242 that the corpus has since REFUTED, so the corpus was asserting that Neville told this on a day it separately says he did not lecture. That is a contradiction rather than an over-confidence, and lowering the confidence would have hidden it instead of resolving it. The refutation stands and the told claim is the wrong side of it. Node 1242 surviving (non-refuted) claim: 1966-10-4 at `certain`. All claims on the node: 1966-10-4 certain; 1967-1-17 refuted; 1966-10-4 certain (preferred). Superseded here: delta 0: 1967-01-17 at `certain` (run `corpus v1 / phase3b`). The telling is dated by its lecture, so with the refuted date removed from consideration the surviving claim is what the telling inherits, at that claim own confidence and no higher.
17 January 1967
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1242, 1967-1-17) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1966-10-4. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
Sources
Source
- Eternity Within ¶23 (I have a sir–name, but when I was only three weeks old my mother heard the voice say, “Call him Neville”. Then it was confirmed 15 minutes later when my uncle spoke to her and said, “Call him Neville,” although the name was never used before in our famil…)