Methodology

What gets included

A case enters the main independence directory only when research establishes four things: an identifiable political project seeking a separate sovereign state, the restoration of claimed independent statehood, or a documented decolonisation process with independence as an explicit option; a distinguishable territorial, institutional or community context; enough historical or contemporary significance to support a useful article; and reliable evidence of the project’s existence, scope and period.

An ethnic identity, a language, a flag, an autonomous region or membership of a representative organisation does not on its own meet that test. Inclusion ordinarily requires at least two independent, substantive sources, with a primary record where one exists. Two outlets repeating the same news-agency report count as one origin.

Related histories — autonomy and Indigenous self-government, political status and decolonisation, concluded independence processes, and unification or territorial transfer — are kept in separate collections. These collections are navigation groupings, not legal categories: one case can appear in several, but it has one page.

Candidates that do not meet the test stay in a private research registry with the reason and a review date. They are not given empty public pages.

How cases are classified

There is no single “status” label. The atlas records separate, dated dimensions: editorial collection; the objectives of named actors in particular periods; an activity assessment with its stated evidence and date; institutional context; methods attributed to specific actors and periods; process stages; and historical outcomes. None of these is a legitimacy score, and no method is ever attributed to an entire people.

Umbrella cases, such as a shared history across several states, can have separately researched branches. A branch gets its own page only when it has its own substantive evidence; otherwise it stays a section of the wider history.

Sources and citations

Every significant factual paragraph is linked to specific claims, and each claim to the exact sources that support, qualify or dispute it, with page or section locators where the source allows. Source records hold bibliographic details and an annotation — never a copy of the source.

Sources are used for what they can establish. Archival and official records show what a document says; election authorities show procedures and results; courts and legislatures show decisions and enacted text; scholarship offers synthesis and interpretation; reputable reporting documents recent events. Movement, party and government websites are labelled as perspectives: they establish what that actor states, not independent verification of its wider claims. Encyclopedias and lists are used only to find sources.

A working link shows that a source is available. It does not show that the source supports a claim — that is checked separately, by a person, during evidence review.

Disputed claims

Where evidence is well established, the atlas says so plainly and does not manufacture balance with unsupported denials. Where sources genuinely disagree, the page identifies exactly what is disputed, attributes each account, explains the quality of the evidence and keeps the uncertainty visible. Casualty figures, legal designations and allegations against living people receive a separate editorial check of their exact wording, scope, jurisdiction and date.

Dates

Dates are stored with their real precision: a day, a month, a year, a decade, a range, an approximation or unknown. “Late nineteenth century” is never turned into an exact date. Years before the common era are shown as BCE and there is no year zero. “Updated” dates change only when content changes substantively.

Maps and boundaries

The basemap shows land only, from Natural Earth 4.1.0 (public domain). The atlas does not draw political boundaries by default, because any boundary dataset embeds a position on disputed territory. Case points are locators — a way to find a place on the map — not borders, capitals or claims.

Any boundary shown for a case comes from a sourced geometry record labelled with its layer type (an administrative unit, a territorial claim by a named actor, a scholarly historical reconstruction, or a descriptive cultural region), its period, its source and its licence. Competing claims are never merged into one shape. Where no suitable sourced shape exists, the atlas uses a labelled locator or nothing.

Referendums and public opinion

Vote records keep the exact question, the organising authority, who could vote, the legal character, the reported counts and the denominator for every percentage. Official figures are retained where rounding differs. A declared result and an assessment of a vote’s legality or legitimacy are recorded as separate, attributed claims. Party vote shares and online polls are never presented as measures of public support.

Review and publication

Content moves through research, drafting, evidence review and editorial review before publication. Approval applies to one exact version of the text; any change creates a new version that must be reviewed again, while readers keep seeing the approved version. The names of reviewers are recorded in the private audit trail. Where one person performed several roles, the record says so; independent review is never implied where it did not happen.

Automated tools may find sources, flag changes and prepare drafts for editors. They cannot publish, cannot approve their own work, and cannot change legal status, territorial control, recognition, casualty estimates or allegations. An automated check that required fields are present is called “validation”, never verification.

Corrections and freshness

Anyone can suggest a correction. Material factual corrections are noted on the page and listed on the corrections page. Status explainers carry the date on which the position was last verified and are scheduled for review; an overdue review is flagged to editors without implying the page is wrong. When a source disappears, its citation is kept and the claim is reviewed rather than silently deleted.

Names and language

Pages use native names and common alternatives respectfully, in their own scripts. Where a naming choice is contested, the page explains it. Translations, when they are published, are reviewed separately and have their own publication record.