Methodology
How Cabeceira collects, validates and publishes each book recommendation, and what happens when evidence does not meet the editorial threshold.
Collection
Every recommendation is attributed to a real person and connected to a source such as a video, interview, podcast, article, book, social post or third-party compilation. We record the source type, publisher, date and URL when known; unknown information stays empty rather than being guessed.
Source validation and status
Each source receives an explicit editorial status: pending, verified, degraded, broken or rejected. Retail links, including Amazon pages, and reserved or empty domains are invalid as evidence even when they helped lead us to the original source.
Publication threshold
The catalog is moving toward publishing only recommendations supported by verified evidence. Secondary compilations require an editorial note explaining their origin and are never presented as the original source. Counts shown on the site use the same publishability rules as the records themselves.
Editorial updates
A substantive review—such as a factual correction, a newly verified source or an edited description—updates the record’s editorial revision date. Technical database changes do not masquerade as editorial updates, and a date is omitted when no real review has occurred.
Automation and auditing
Automated policy checks can observe what would be blocked or enforce the publication threshold. Source-integrity reports use the same rules as the public site and the admin, allowing release reviews to track pending, verified and problematic evidence without inventing a second standard.