drafting-manuscriptlisted

# Drafting a Manuscript Turn stable synthesis pages into publishable prose. Every claim gets a citation. Every citation resolves in `output/bibtex/references.bib`. No inventing, no paraphrasing from memory — the wiki is the single source of truth for *what is claimed*. But the wiki is deliberately terse — bullets, one-sentence claims, page numbers in parentheses. It is a **pointer to the depth, not the depth itself.** Drafting straight from it produces dense, compressed prose that reads like reflowed bullet points, without the examples and explanations a reader needs. The fix is *not* to write more from memory (that reintroduces hallucination) but to **reach back to the sources for depth**: the illustrative examples, the explanation of *why* a claim holds, and the surrounding argument live in the source pages' quote/example sections and — when those are too thin — in the original PDFs in the shared library (`<library>/pdf/<bibkey>.pdf`, put there by `acquire-sources`). Elaboration must be **grounded and cited**; only connective/expository framing (transitions, restating an argument's logic) is uncited. See [Writing with depth](#writing-with-depth-not-bullet-reflow). And the wiki tells you *what is claimed* — never *what this chapter argues*. The claim chain is the author's contribution, not the wiki's, and it is the thing that drifts: drafted in one pass, a chapter wanders into whatever the sources happen to be rich about, and the drift only becomes visible once thousands