Version Control
Version control ensures that every change to an EpsteinWiki page, evidence file, citation, image, classification, or editorial conclusion remains identifiable, reviewable, and reversible.
EpsteinWiki contributors must preserve the history of published information. Corrections should improve the record without concealing what was previously published, who changed it, or why the change was necessary.
Version control is especially important when pages concern survivors, minors, living people, criminal allegations, disputed identities, legal proceedings, contradictory evidence, or records released under the Epstein Files Transparency Act.
Snapshot
| Action | Required control |
|---|---|
| Creating a page | Begin as a draft and use the approved template |
| Editing a published page | Review the current page before making changes |
| Saving a revision | Provide a clear edit summary |
| Correcting a factual error | Record what was wrong, what changed, and the supporting source |
| Replacing a source | Preserve the original citation and explain the replacement |
| Replacing an evidence file | Upload a new version without destroying the preserved original |
| Changing a legal status | Verify the current court record and request review |
| Changing a person’s classification | Document the evidence and obtain a second editor |
| Restoring an earlier version | Compare revisions before restoring |
| Deleting a page or file | Obtain editor or administrator approval |
| Editing a locked page | Contact the active editor instead of overriding the lock |
| Publishing a major update | Record the review date and responsible editor |
The central rule is:
Every meaningful change must be traceable, explainable, and reversible.
Why Version Control Matters
EpsteinWiki documents a large and evolving evidentiary record. New court filings, government releases, witness statements, financial records, investigative reporting, and contradictory evidence can change how a page should be understood.
Version control helps EpsteinWiki:
- Preserve the history of a page
- Identify when information was added or removed
- Distinguish corrections from silent rewriting
- Recover material deleted by mistake
- Compare competing interpretations
- Protect citations and evidence links
- Track changes to legal and claim status
- Coordinate multiple contributors
- Review sensitive editorial decisions
- Maintain reader trust
- Respond responsibly to correction requests
- Prevent unsupported claims from replacing sourced information
Version history is not a substitute for careful editing. Contributors must still verify information before saving or publishing it.
What Must Be Tracked
Version control applies to more than article text.
Page Content
Track changes to:
- Titles
- Introductions
- Snapshot tables
- Biographical information
- Timelines
- Evidence summaries
- Legal history
- Allegations and responses
- Questions requiring further investigation
- Editorial notes
- Source lists
- Meta descriptions
- Keywords
Evidence and Citations
Track changes to:
- EFTA identifiers
- Direct Epstein Data links
- Court docket numbers
- Exhibit numbers
- Page citations
- Government source links
- Archived links
- Document descriptions
- File names
- Uploaded evidence
- Screenshots
- Transcripts
- Images and captions
Classifications
Track changes to:
- Categories
- Tags
- Page types
- Person roles
- Claim status
- Legal status
- Evidence status
- Involvement levels
- Sensitivity labels
- Review requirements
Administrative Changes
Track changes to:
- Publication status
- Page ownership
- Redirects
- Page merges
- Page deletions
- File replacements
- Access restrictions
- Moderator locks
- Correction notices
A change may appear minor in the editor while materially affecting how a person, allegation, or source is presented. Contributors must evaluate the meaning of the change, not only its length.
Version Statuses
EpsteinWiki pages should move through defined editorial stages.
| Status | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Draft | The page is being created and is not ready for public use |
| Under Review | The page is complete enough for editorial review |
| Revision Requested | An editor has identified changes required before publication |
| Approved | The page has passed the required editorial review |
| Published | The approved page is publicly available |
| Update Required | New evidence or a detected problem requires revision |
| Correction Pending | A material factual correction is being verified |
| Restricted Review | The page contains sensitive material requiring limited review |
| Archived | The page is preserved but no longer treated as the current version |
| Redirected | The page has been merged or moved to another canonical page |
Do not publish a draft simply to make it easier for another contributor to find. Use the appropriate draft or review status.
Version Numbering
Formal version numbers may be recorded in the editorial log when a page receives substantial development.
Draft Versions
Use draft numbers for work that has not been published:
- Version 0.1 for an initial structured draft
- Version 0.2 for additional evidence or rewriting
- Version 0.3 for editorial revisions
- Version 0.9 for a page awaiting final approval
Published Versions
Use published numbers when the editorial log requires them:
- Version 1.0 for the first approved publication
- Version 1.1 for a limited factual or citation update
- Version 1.2 for another minor update
- Version 2.0 for a substantial expansion or material restructuring
- Version 3.0 for another major evidentiary revision
WordPress does not require these numbers for its native revision history. They are editorial labels used to describe significant publication stages.
Do not place version numbers in the public page title unless the page represents a formally dated report or recurring publication.
Draft and Editing Workflow
Review the Existing Page
Before editing:
- Read the entire current page.
- Open the existing sources.
- Check the current categories and tags.
- Review the legal and claim status.
- Check the last reviewed date.
- Review recent WordPress revisions.
- Determine whether another editor is actively working on the page.
Do not begin by replacing the entire page with a new draft. Preserve sourced information unless it is inaccurate, duplicative, irrelevant, unsafe, or superseded by stronger evidence.
Work in Draft Status
New pages and major rewrites should remain drafts until:
- The approved template is complete
- Important claims have citations
- EFTA links have been verified
- Internal links have been added
- Contrary evidence has been considered
- Privacy risks have been reviewed
- Required editorial approval has occurred
- The page has been previewed
Preview Before Saving
Preview the page and check:
- Headings
- Separator lines
- Tables
- Links
- Images
- Captions
- Mobile readability
- Source formatting
- Category placement
- Tags
- Meta description
- Keywords
A successful save does not mean the page is ready to publish.
Edit Summaries
Every meaningful revision should include a concise edit summary.
A useful edit summary states:
- What changed
- Why it changed
- Which source supports the change
- Whether content was added, corrected, removed, or reorganized
- Whether additional review is required
Acceptable Edit Summaries
- Corrected filing date using docket entry 47
- Added EFTA01234567 and direct Epstein Data citation
- Updated legal status following dismissal order
- Restored sourced paragraph removed in previous revision
- Replaced broken government link with archived official copy
- Added documented denial and contradictory evidence
- Removed duplicate paragraph without changing meaning
- Updated person role following second editor review
- Corrected identity after comparing date of birth and employment records
- Redacted identifying information pending survivor privacy review
Inadequate Edit Summaries
Do not use summaries such as:
- Updated
- Fixed
- Changes
- New information
- Cleaned up
- Edited page
- Corrected things
- More evidence
An editor reviewing the history should be able to understand the purpose of the revision without reconstructing the entire edit.
Concurrent Editing and Page Locks
Multiple contributors should not edit the same page independently at the same time.
When WordPress indicates that another person is editing a page:
- Do not take control of the page.
- Contact the active editor.
- Explain the change you intended to make.
- Wait until the editor saves and exits.
- Refresh the page before beginning your work.
- Review the newly saved revision.
- Incorporate your changes without removing the other editor’s work.
Taking over a locked page can overwrite unsaved changes.
Moderators and administrators may have the technical ability to override a lock. That ability should be used only when:
- The original editor confirms that the session is abandoned
- The lock is clearly stale
- An urgent safety correction is necessary
- A harmful publication must be contained
- An administrator authorizes the action
The reason for overriding a lock must be recorded.
WordPress Revisions
The WordPress revision system stores saved drafts and published updates. It allows editors to review additions, removals, and other changes before restoring an earlier version.
WordPress autosaves are stored separately from the published page and do not automatically overwrite published content.
Opening Revisions
In the WordPress editor:
- Open the page or post.
- Open the settings sidebar.
- Select the Page or Post tab.
- Locate Revisions.
- Select the displayed revision count.
The exact screen may vary by WordPress version and site configuration.
Comparing Revisions
Use the revision comparison screen to examine:
- The editor responsible for each revision
- The date and time of the change
- Text that was added
- Text that was removed
- Text that was changed
- Differences between selected revisions
WordPress 7.0 introduced an updated revision screen. Earlier versions use the classic comparison screen. The classic screen also permits comparison between any two selected revisions.
Restoring a Revision
Before restoring:
- Identify the last reliable version.
- Compare it with the current version.
- List valid changes that occurred afterward.
- Save or record any material that must be preserved.
- Confirm that restoration will not reintroduce an older error.
- Obtain approval when the change affects sensitive content.
- Restore the selected revision.
- Reapply any valid later additions.
- Preview the page.
- Record why the restoration occurred.
Never restore a revision merely because it is older or was written by a preferred contributor.
Rollback Standards
A rollback returns a page to an earlier reliable state.
Appropriate Rollback Triggers
A rollback may be necessary when a revision:
- Removes sourced information without explanation
- Introduces unsupported allegations
- Misidentifies a person
- Exposes a survivor or minor
- Changes legal status inaccurately
- Breaks important citations
- Replaces an EFTA record with the wrong file
- Adds manipulated or fabricated evidence
- Damages the page structure
- Introduces spam or vandalism
- Deletes contradictory evidence
- Creates substantial formatting corruption
- Overwrites another editor’s approved work
When Not to Roll Back
Do not use rollback to:
- Resolve a personal disagreement
- Remove an accurately attributed denial
- Suppress contradictory evidence
- Restore outdated legal information
- Avoid documenting a correction
- Erase another contributor’s work without review
- Reinstate unsupported claims
- Bypass the moderation process
After a Rollback
After restoring the page:
- Confirm that the public page displays correctly
- Recheck all important links
- Preserve valid later additions
- Record the rollback reason
- Notify affected editors
- Apply a temporary editing lock if necessary
- Request further review when the dispute remains unresolved
Corrections and Quiet Edits
Not every edit requires a public correction notice.
Quiet Edits
Quiet edits are limited to changes that do not alter meaning.
Examples include:
- Spelling corrections
- Grammar corrections
- Formatting repairs
- Broken internal link repairs
- Consistent capitalization
- Duplicate word removal
- Table alignment
- Accessibility improvements
- Updating a link to the same unchanged source
The internal revision history should still preserve these changes.
Material Corrections
A material correction changes the factual meaning, legal meaning, identity, evidentiary interpretation, or central conclusion of a page.
Examples include:
- Correcting the identity of a person
- Correcting a date that affects a timeline
- Changing an allegation to a court finding
- Changing a conviction status
- Removing a claim unsupported by the cited document
- Correcting an EFTA identifier
- Replacing an altered or incomplete evidence file
- Adding a previously omitted denial
- Correcting a headline or featured image
- Revising an involvement level
A material correction notice should state:
- What was incorrect or incomplete
- What was changed
- When the correction was made
- Which source supports the correction
- Whether the headline, image, identity, legal status, or central conclusion was affected
Do not silently remove a material error from a published page.
Evidence File Version Control
Evidence files must be preserved separately from the article text.
Preserve the Original
Whenever lawfully possible, retain:
- The original downloaded file
- The original file name
- The source URL
- The download date
- The originating agency or repository
- The EFTA identifier
- The docket and exhibit information
- The file format
- The page count
- Any available authenticity or provenance information
Do not alter the preserved original.
OCR, redaction, compression, rotation, annotation, transcription, and image enhancement create derivative versions. They must not replace the preserved original.
Label Derivative Files
Clearly identify derivative files as:
- OCR copy
- Searchable copy
- Redacted copy
- Annotated copy
- Compressed copy
- Extracted pages
- Transcription
- Enhanced image
- Working copy
A derivative file must link back to or identify the original source.
File Naming
Use lowercase, descriptive file names without spaces, emojis, or random character strings.
Preferred structure:
case-title_document-type_release-year.pdf
Examples:
us-v-epstein_indictment_2019.pdf
foia-release_fbi-records_2020.pdf
maxwell-case_exhibit-14.pdf
When a revised file is necessary, add a meaningful version or date:
maxwell-case_exhibit-14_ocr-v2.pdf
fbi-records_corrected_September-6-2026.pdf
Do not use labels such as final, final-final, new, or latest.
File Integrity
When available, record a checksum or other integrity value for important original files. A checksum can help determine whether a stored file has changed since it was preserved.
Integrity information does not prove that the statements inside a document are accurate. It helps establish whether the file itself remained unchanged.
EFTA Record Control
Every EFTA citation must include the exact identifier and a direct link to the corresponding record on Epstein Data.
Before changing an EFTA citation:
- Open the existing link.
- Confirm the EFTA identifier.
- Confirm the page count.
- Compare the cited passage with the document.
- Check whether the new file is a duplicate, replacement, or different record.
- Preserve the original citation in the editorial history.
- Explain why the citation changed.
- Request review when the change affects a significant claim.
Do not replace an EFTA record merely because another copy has clearer OCR. Keep the original evidence link and identify the searchable or enhanced copy as a derivative.
If an EFTA link becomes unavailable:
- Confirm that the outage is not temporary
- Search Epstein Data by exact identifier
- Check for a replacement location
- Preserve the original URL
- Add an archived copy when lawful and available
- Mark the page for EFTA Link Verification
- Do not change the identifier without evidence that it was incorrect
Source Replacement and Archiving
A broken, moved, or updated source should not simply disappear from the page history.
Replacing a Source
Before replacing a citation:
- Compare the original and replacement.
- Confirm that both support the same statement.
- Determine whether the new version contains revisions.
- Preserve the original citation in the editorial log.
- Update the visible link.
- Record the reason for replacement.
- Revise the article if the new source changes the evidence.
A secondary source should not replace an available primary source merely because it is easier to read.
Archived Copies
Archived copies may be used when:
- The original public link is broken
- The source was removed
- The original page changed
- A stable historical copy is needed
- The archive lawfully preserves public material
Whenever possible, retain both the original URL and the archived copy.
An archived webpage does not automatically authenticate every statement it contains.
Updated Government Records
Government agencies may replace files, correct redactions, release clearer copies, or publish expanded collections.
When that occurs:
- Preserve the earlier version
- Record the date each version was accessed
- Compare the files
- Note material differences
- Update affected claims
- Keep the strongest direct source available
- Avoid describing a replacement file as identical unless it has been compared
Page Moves, Merges, and Deletions
Moving a Page
When changing a title or URL:
- Confirm the new canonical title
- Preserve the existing page history
- Create a redirect from the former URL
- Update important internal links
- Check categories and tags
- Record the reason for the move
Do not create a new page and abandon the old page when a controlled move can preserve history.
Merging Pages
Before merging duplicate pages:
- Compare both revision histories.
- Identify the canonical page.
- Preserve unique sourced material.
- Combine citations without duplication.
- Resolve conflicting claims.
- Preserve correction notices.
- Redirect the duplicate page.
- Record which pages were merged.
Deleting Pages
Contributors must not permanently delete pages or evidence files without editor or administrator approval.
Deletion may be considered when a page:
- Duplicates an existing page
- Contains unlawfully published material
- Exposes protected personal information
- Was created as spam or vandalism
- Cannot be corrected without preserving serious harm
- Contains a file that EpsteinWiki is not legally permitted to host
When possible, use a draft, private, restricted, archived, or redirected status instead of permanent deletion.
The deletion record should identify:
- The page or file
- The reason
- The approving editor
- The date
- Whether recovery remains possible
- Whether a redirect or replacement exists
Moderator Locks and Emergency Changes
A moderator may temporarily lock a page when:
- An edit dispute is active
- Vandalism is recurring
- A legal status is being verified
- A survivor privacy issue is under review
- A person’s identity is contested
- Manipulated evidence may have been added
- A major correction is pending
- Multiple contributors are overwriting one another
A lock should not be used to conceal criticism or prevent evidence supported corrections.
Emergency Removal
Immediate temporary removal may be appropriate when content:
- Exposes a survivor or minor
- Publishes private identifying information
- Contains an imminent safety risk
- Includes unlawful sexual abuse material
- Uses a demonstrably false identity
- Contains malicious code or spam
- Presents fabricated evidence as authentic
After emergency containment, the moderator must preserve the revision, document the reason, and begin the appropriate review.
Step by Step Version Control Workflow
Step 1: Review the Current Version
Read the complete page, open the sources, and inspect recent revisions.
Step 2: Confirm Editorial Authority
Determine whether the change can be made directly or requires a second editor, moderator, or administrator.
Step 3: Preserve Existing Evidence
Do not remove sourced information until its accuracy, relevance, and safety have been evaluated.
Step 4: Make Focused Changes
Change only what is necessary. Avoid replacing the entire page when a controlled revision will preserve history more clearly.
Step 5: Verify Sources
Check EFTA identifiers, docket numbers, exhibit numbers, page references, dates, names, and direct URLs.
Step 6: Record an Edit Summary
Explain what changed, why it changed, and which evidence supports it.
Step 7: Preview the Page
Check structure, separator lines, links, tables, images, categories, tags, meta description, and keywords.
Step 8: Obtain Required Review
Request a second editor for serious allegations, identity changes, legal status changes, sensitive material, and involvement level changes.
Step 9: Publish or Update
Confirm that the correct version is public and that no draft text or internal note remains.
Step 10: Record the Review Date
Use the format Month Day, Year.
Step 11: Monitor the Result
Check the public page, redirects, evidence links, tag archives, and related internal pages.
Questions
Does WordPress save every change automatically?
WordPress stores saved revisions and maintains an autosave for each user. Site settings may limit how many revisions are retained. Contributors should still save carefully and provide meaningful edit summaries.
Does an autosave replace the published page?
No. WordPress stores autosaves separately and does not automatically overwrite the published version.
Can I restore an older version myself?
Only when you understand what the restoration will remove and have the necessary editorial authority. Sensitive or material restorations require review.
Can I overwrite another contributor’s edit?
No. Review and preserve valid work. Resolve disagreements through evidence and editorial review.
What if another contributor is editing the page?
Do not override the page lock. Contact the contributor and coordinate the edits.
Does every spelling correction need a public correction notice?
No. A spelling correction that does not change meaning may be handled as a quiet edit. The internal revision history should still preserve it.
When is a public correction required?
Use a public correction when the change affects identity, factual meaning, legal status, evidentiary interpretation, the headline, a featured image, or a central conclusion.
Can an incorrect claim simply be deleted?
The visible error may need to be removed, but the revision history and correction record should document what happened.
Should an outdated source be deleted?
Not automatically. Preserve the original citation, add the updated source, and explain material differences.
Can a clearer OCR copy replace the original evidence file?
No. Preserve the original and label the OCR copy as a derivative.
Should every file use a version number?
Not every file requires one. Add a version number or date when more than one meaningful version exists.
Can I use “final” in a file name?
No. Labels such as final, new, and latest become confusing when later versions are created.
Can a page be permanently deleted?
Only with editor or administrator approval. A redirect, archive, private status, or restricted status is often preferable.
What if a correction request is disputed?
Preserve the request and evidence, mark the page for review, and avoid changing the central claim until the dispute has been evaluated.
Can version history prove that a claim is true?
No. Version history shows how content changed. The underlying claim must still be evaluated using reliable evidence.
What if a rollback removes useful later work?
Recover and reapply valid later additions after restoring the reliable version.
Should involvement level changes be logged?
Yes. Record the previous level, new level, evidence basis, reason, date, and approving editor.
Should tag and category changes be tracked?
Yes. Classification changes can materially alter how readers discover and interpret a page.
Who may override a moderator lock?
Only an authorized moderator or administrator acting under the editorial process.
What is the safest response to uncertainty?
Keep the page in draft or review status, preserve the competing evidence, and request another editor.
Related EpsteinWiki Guides
- Formatting Rules
- Upload Instructions
- Tagging System
- Editorial Standards
- Corrections Policy
- Moderation and Flagging Protocols
- Handling Contradictory Evidence
- Evidence Framework
Sources
- WordPress Documentation: Revisions
- WordPress Documentation: Posts Screen
- National Archives: Managing Web Records
- National Archives: Records Management Profile
- Library of Congress: Recommended Formats Statement
- Library of Congress: Digital Preservation
- United States Department of Justice: Epstein Library
- Epstein Data
Editorial Note
EpsteinWiki version control exists to protect the integrity of the archive and the people affected by its contents. Revision history must never be manipulated to conceal errors, erase contradictory evidence, expose protected identities, or allow unsupported claims to replace sourced information.
Corrections are a normal part of responsible archival work. The goal is not to create the appearance that a page was always perfect. The goal is to maintain an honest record of what was known, what changed, why it changed, and which evidence supports the current version.
Last reviewed: September 6, 2026