Neville remembers his mother's beautiful garden in his childhood: she was passionately fond of it, always carried a parasol because she was so fair the sun blistered her, and directed her gardeners and grafted her roses.
Date (happened)
between 1905 and 1921
unresolved
between 1905 and 1921
stated · probable · preferred
Told / reported
27 October 1967
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 1296 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 1296 surviving (non-refuted) claim: 1967-10-27 at `certain`. All claims on the node: 1967-10-27 certain; 1967-10-27 certain; 1969-10-18 refuted; 1967-10-27 certain (preferred). Superseded here: delta 0: 1969-10-18 at `certain` (run `corpus v1 / phase3b`).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.
18 October 1969
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1296, 1969-10-18) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1967-10-27. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.