# Source investigation findings Running log of sources that were investigated, whether or not they were added. **Append-only, version-independent** — unlike the `*_v0_3.md` artifacts, which are point-in-time snapshots of one release's candidate review. Purpose: stop the same source being re-investigated from scratch every few months. A negative finding is as valuable as a positive one, as long as it records *what was checked* and *what would change the answer*. Related, don't duplicate: - `source_scouting_v0_3.md` — v0.3 candidate shortlist (HuggingFace-centric) - `source_candidate_audit_v0_3.md` — machine-generated audit of those HF cards - `source_license_review_v0_3.md` — v0.3 license decision table ## How to add an entry One `##` section per source. Keep these fields: - **Investigated** — date, so a stale finding is visible as stale. - **Verdict** — `added` / `blocked` / `hold` / `rejected`, plus the one-line reason. - **Enumeration** — how you would actually get the data, or why you can't. - **License evidence** — what you checked, with URLs. Separate what you *verified yourself* from what you read second-hand; label the weak ones. - **Blockers** — what must be resolved before this can ship. - **Lesson** — anything generalizable to other sources. Optional. Write down the API endpoints and quirks you had to dig for. That digging is the expensive part, and it is invisible in a verdict line. --- ## zpe.gov.pl — Zintegrowana Platforma Edukacyjna **Investigated:** 2026-08-27 **Verdict:** `hold` — technically very tractable, blocked on per-material license evidence. Do not build a fetcher until the license question below is answered. Ministry of Education platform (successor to `epodreczniki.pl`), e-materials across all school subjects. Attractive because the corpus has **no modern instructional/pedagogic register at all**, and this is contemporary, clean, editorially reviewed Polish prose. ### Enumeration — solved There is no sitemap (`/sitemap.xml` → 404) and site search is client-side, but `https://zpe.gov.pl/config.js` exposes an undocumented JSON API: ``` window.CP_CONFIGURATION = {... "apiUrl":"https://zpe.gov.pl/api/v1/" ...} ``` ``` GET https://zpe.gov.pl/api/v1/search?query=&limit=20&offset=N → {"count": 23843, "offset": 0, "limit": 20, "data": [{"id": "P18l4AKOi", "title": "Fotosynteza", "subject": [...], "stage": [...], "tags": [], ...}]} ``` Verified directly (2026-08-27): - `count` = **23,843** materials for the empty query. - Deep paging works — `offset=5000` returns rows, no cursor needed. - `robots.txt` is `User-agent: * / Allow: /`. - Article pages `/a//` are **fully server-rendered**; text lives in `data-editor-content` blocks. No JS execution required to extract prose. - Book pages `/b//` render their material list client-side (0 server-side `/a/` links), so `/b/` is useless for crawling. Use the API. Other endpoints probed and 404: `api/v1/materials`, `api/v1/document(s)/`, `api/v1/footer`, `api/v1/menu`, `api/v1/search/materials`. Only `api/v1/search?query=` responded. ### License evidence — the blocker **Verified directly:** - **No document-level license marker exists in the served HTML.** The only machine-readable license strings are per-figure, inside `
`, e.g. `Źródło: GroMar, licencja: CC BY 3.0.` and `Źródło: Sławomir Szaruga, licencja: CC BY 3.0.` These attach to **illustrations, not to the prose**. - **The site footer is `` — JS-rendered.** This matters: the accepted legal basis for both `govpl` and `samorzad_gov_pl` in `src/sources.py` is a *server-side footer string* declaring CC BY-SA 4.0. ZPE has no such string. **That precedent does not transfer to ZPE.** - The platform `regulamin` states: *"Korzystanie z Materiału odbywać się może tylko i wyłącznie w zakresie dozwolonym przepisami ustawy o prawie autorskim i prawach pokrewnych"* — statutory permitted-use only, which is not an open license. Reading the surrounding clauses, this section appears scoped to material *uploaded by users to* the platform rather than to ministry e-materials, but the wording is not self-limiting and a reviewer will land on it. **Second-hand, not verified — confirm before relying on any of it:** - Ministry-produced e-materials are said to be CC BY 3.0, funded under POKL 2007–2013 / POWER 2014–2020. - User-contributed materials are reported to carry **CC BY-NC-SA 4.0**. NC is already on the reject list (`source_scouting_v0_3.md`), so those must be excluded, not merely flagged. - Literary works embedded in e-materials are reported to sit under a non-free *"licencja edukacyjna"* where authors or heirs did not agree to open release. This is the highest-risk content class on the platform. ### Consequences for design - ZPE cannot be a single-license shard. It has to be **per-record license-gated**, `license_spdx: MIXED`, same shape as `biblioteka_nauki` and `europeana`. - Available heuristic, **not** license evidence: ministry materials come back with `subject` and `stage` populated; user uploads return `"subject": [], "stage": []` (the first empty-query result is an all-caps user upload with both empty). Usable as a pre-filter, useless as provenance. - Rough size if ~10–15k ministry materials survive the gate: **~30–100M tokens**. Estimate only — nothing was counted. Good register, modest scale. ### Extraction hazards (seen in a single sampled page) - Interactive-exercise chrome: `Pokaż podpowiedź`, `Pokaż odpowiedź` buttons. - JSON blobs embedded in `data-editor-params` attributes (`gameTitle`, `feedbackPositive`, …) — must not leak into `text`. - Per-figure attribution lines repeated throughout the body. - Glossary / `Zapamiętaj!` boilerplate repeated across many materials — needs frequency-based boilerplate detection, not a hand-written blocklist. ### What would unblock this Any one of: a resolvable per-material license field (API or page markup); an authoritative ORE/MEN page granting open reuse of e-material *text*; or written permission. Absent that, ZPE stays out — the datasheet could not honestly answer "where does the license statement live", which is a required field for any PR. ### Lesson Check for a **server-rendered** license statement early. A JS-rendered footer is not usable license evidence, and "it's a `gov.pl` domain" is not a license — the `govpl` and `samorzad_gov_pl` entries hold up because a specific footer string was fetched and quoted, not because of the domain. --- ## ParlaMint-PL — parliamentary debates 2015–2022 **Investigated:** 2026-08-27 **Verdict:** `ready to build, low yield` — license and distribution verified, the fetcher is the only missing piece. But it is a **date-hole patch worth ~36M net-new tokens**, not a diversity win. Size it before prioritising it. Already registered in `src/sources.py` as `parlamint_pl`, but there is **no shard in `data/`**. ### Size — measured, not guessed From the official stats at `github.com/clarin-eric/ParlaMint/tree/v5.0/Build/Metadata` (`ParlaMint-overview-stats.tsv`, `ParlaMint-speeches-stats.tsv`): ``` ID Lang Bodies Ts From To Yrs Mw/Yr Mw PL pl low+upp 4 2015-11 2022-06 6.7 5.35 36.06 ``` - **36.06M words**, **228,326 speeches**, 4 terms, both chambers. - Token conversion measured on our own `parliamentary` shard (same register, same cl100k encoder; 6,000 docs / 9.7M words): **2.654 tokens/word**, 7.24 chars/word. - → **~96M tokens gross**, ≈1% of the current 9.68B corpus. - Download: `ParlaMint-PL.tgz`, 185.3 MB. ### Overlap with the existing `parliamentary` shard — the real issue ParlaMint-PL is **derived from PPC**, which is exactly what the `parliamentary` shard is (1991–2019). Time overlap runs 2015-11 → 2019-12, about 4.2 of the 6.7 years, ≈22M words likely already present. **Net new ≈ 14M words ≈ 36M tokens**, covering 2020-01 → 2022-06. That estimate is soft in both directions: - `parliamentary` has **no per-document dates** — `created` is the single literal `'1991-01-01, 2019-12-31'` on all 324,622 rows. The overlap cannot be measured by filtering, only by comparing content. - PPC includes committee sittings and interpellations; ParlaMint-PL is plenary only. So ParlaMint's 2015–2019 portion is plausibly a *subset* of what already ships, making the real overlap higher than the time-share implies. **Exact dedup will not catch this.** `build_dynaword.py` dedups on `sha1` of the whole document. ParlaMint ships one document per session; PPC's segmentation differs, so byte-identical documents are unlikely and the duplicates pass straight through the gate. This needs **near-dedup, for which the repo has no committed tooling** — the HPLT expansion's near-dedup was run outside `src/`. Budget for that, or the shard silently duplicates existing data. ### Version note **ParlaMint 5.0 does not extend Polish** — PL still ends 2022-06, same as the 3.0 deposit already cited in `sources.py` (handle `11356/1486`; 5.0 is `11356/2004`). Upgrading buys corrections, not coverage. Neither version closes the gap to `sejm_api` (2023 onward): mid-2022 through end-2022 stays empty. ### Verified - CLARIN.SI handle `11356/1486` resolves (HTTP 200). The `upstream` URL recorded in `sources.py` is correct and live. - License: **CC BY 4.0**, stated on the repository record. - ParlaMint 3.0 overall: 26 comparable corpora, 7,468,674 utterances, 1,147,800,265 words; debates mostly 2015 → mid-2022. - The distribution ships a **plain-text (`.txt`) edition** alongside TEI/XML and linguistically-annotated `.ana.xml`. Filenames are per-session, e.g. `ParlaMint-PL_2017-07-20-sejm-46-3.txt`. Use the `.txt` edition — no TEI parsing needed. - Polish covers **both chambers**: `-sejm-` and `-senat-` session files. ### Why it is still worth doing Fills 2020 → mid-2022, between `parliamentary` (ends 2019) and `sejm_api` (2023 onward). Same CC-BY-4.0 family as existing sources, so there is no new license question to answer, and the plain-text edition means no TEI parsing. Cheap. Just do not expect it to move the totals — and do not build it before a source that adds a register the corpus lacks. ### Drift found while checking `src/sources.py` (the `parlamint_pl` `provenance` field) states the corpus was *"Fetched directly from the CLARIN.SI plain-text edition (ParlaMint-PL.tgz) by `src/fetch_parlamint.py`"*. **That script does not exist in `src/`.** The provenance describes a fetch that no committed code performs. Either write the script or correct the field before this ships. --- ## Sejm API — interpelacje and zapytania poselskie **Investigated:** 2026-08-27 **Verdict:** `hold — recheck`. Not a license problem; `api.sejm.gov.pl` was unreachable from the investigating network on the day, so the endpoints could not be confirmed. Retry before writing anything off. ### What happened - `api.sejm.gov.pl` resolves (`194.41.12.231`) but every request hangs and then fails — plain `curl` times out at 45s, a proxied fetch returns `ECONNRESET`. - `https://www.sejm.gov.pl/` responds normally (302), and other external hosts were fine the same session, so this is specific to the API host: either an outage, or that host filtering the source network. - `src/fetch_sejm_api.py` (committed, working) uses this same host, so the API is normally reachable. Treat as transient until proven otherwise. ### Unverified — what to check on retry - Whether `sejm/term{N}/interpellations` and `sejm/term{N}/writtenQuestions` exist, and their paging parameters. - Whether the **ministry's reply body** is retrievable as text, or only as a linked PDF. This decides whether the source is worth building: the replies are the substantial half. - Document counts per term. ### Why it is on the list Reuses the existing `fetch_sejm_api.py` legal basis unchanged — official parliamentary materials outside copyright under art. 4(2) pr. aut., reusable under the Open Data Act. Question/answer prose is argumentative register, which the corpus is short on. No new license work needed. --- ## CLARIN-PL DSpace (PELCRA Spokes, and the `1000_novels` upstream) **Investigated:** 2026-08-27 **Verdict:** `blocked — temporary`. The repository is down for reorganization. Nothing to decide until it returns. ### Verified - `https://clarin-pl.eu/dspace/` serves a maintenance notice: *"Trwają prace nad repozytorium. Prowadzimy prace serwisowe oraz reorganizację repozytorium DSpace… Repozytorium będzie ponownie dostępne wkrótce."* - Every item handle under it 404s: `11321/312`, `11321/544`, `11321/545`, `11321/547` — nginx 404, not a DSpace "item not found". - The global resolver is broken for this prefix too: `hdl.handle.net/11321/*` returns **HTTP 500**. So no PELCRA record (Spokes, EMO, PARL, EMI) can have its license checked right now. Conversational Polish remains the corpus's biggest register gap, so this is worth re-checking periodically. ### Side effect on shipped data `src/sources.py` records `https://clarin-pl.eu/dspace/handle/11321/312` as the `upstream` for **`1000_novels`**, which is a released shard. That URL currently does not resolve. Presumed temporary, but the citation in a published datasheet is dead as of this date. ### Expected concern when it returns PELCRA spoken corpora are transcribed private conversation. Expect NC-flavoured or restricted licensing, and expect a personal-data question — these recordings involve identifiable private individuals, not public officials acting officially. Both must be resolved before use. --- ## NIK — Najwyższa Izba Kontroli audit reports **Investigated:** 2026-08-27 **Verdict:** `hold` — permissive but **non-standard** license, and enumeration is unsolved. Viable with work; not a quick win. ### License evidence — verified `https://www.nik.gov.pl/zasady/prawa-autorskie.html` states: > *"Korzystanie z materiałów publikowanych w serwisach internetowych Najwyższej > Izby Kontroli nie wymaga uzyskania zgody NIK. Nie dotyczy to elementów odrębnie > zastrzeżonych (do których prawa autorskie przysługują osobom trzecim), w > szczególności oznaczonych materiałów zdjęciowych oraz tekstów publikowanych > pierwotnie w innych źródłach."* Attribution to *"Najwyższa Izba Kontroli (nik.gov.pl)"* is requested, not required. Assessment: a **custom permissive notice, not a standard open license** — no CC, no CC0, no SPDX identifier. It carries a third-party carve-out that matters here, because audit reports quote external sources. A separate and probably stronger argument is that audit reports are *materiały urzędowe* under art. 4 pkt 2 pr. aut., the same basis as `dziennik_ustaw` and `sejm_api`. If this source is built, lead with the statutory argument and cite the site notice as corroboration. ### Enumeration — unsolved - `robots.txt` allows crawling, but disallows `/szukaj/`, `/p/`, `/g2/`, `/cms/`, `/do_druku/`. `/g2/` looks like the file store, which likely means **report PDFs are off-limits to crawlers**. - `/kontrole/wyniki-kontroli-nik/` returns 200 (~72 kB) but the report list is **JS-rendered**: zero report links in the server HTML, only pagination scaffolding (`fmax,js,strona,1.html`). - The `/prosta/` ("simple") variant is also JS-rendered — 0 report links. - No `/sitemap.xml` (404). Same shape as ZPE: a backend API almost certainly exists and would need to be found (check the page's JS config for an `apiUrl`, as worked for ZPE). ### Verdict rationale Register value is real — long-form analytical prose, unlike statute text. But between a bespoke license, a third-party-content carve-out, PDF paths blocked by `robots.txt`, and unsolved enumeration, this is several days of work. Lower priority than ParlaMint-PL or Sejm interpelacje. --- ## Billion-scale survey — what can actually move the totals **Investigated:** 2026-08-27 Context: most candidates land at 30–200M tokens, which is noise against a 9.68B corpus. This entry records the only options measured at **500M–5B**, i.e. comparable to `european_hplt_v3_pl` (2.56B), `eurlex` (2.38B), `parliamentary` (1.65B). All numbers below were measured on the day, not taken from cards. Token conversion throughout: **2.654 tokens/word**, measured on the repo's own `parliamentary` shard (6,000 docs / 9.7M words, cl100k). Use it instead of guessing — Polish runs far above the ~1.3 rule of thumb for English. | candidate | measured | est. tokens | license | blocker | |---|---|---|---|---| | SAOS judgments | 540,338 docs, mean 3,067 w | **~4.4B** (floor ~2.8B) | art. 4 pkt 2 pr. aut. | register: pure legal | | FineWeb-2 `pol_Latn` | 152,003,298 docs, 225.9 GB | ~83B raw, **4–8B** filtered | ODC-By | dedup vs existing HPLT | | PleIAs/Polish-PD | 68,176 docs, 0.75B words | **~2.0B** nominal | public domain | OCR corruption | | HPLT leftovers | shards `8_5`, `8_6`, 31.6 GB | ~230M | CC0 | none — just small | ### SAOS — biggest clean win, already half-built `https://www.saos.org.pl/api/search/judgments?pageSize=1&pageNumber=0` reports `totalResults: 540338`. Sampled 100 judgments from `api/dump/judgments?pageSize=100&pageNumber=0`: **mean 3,067 words, median 1,920, p10 816, p90 7,197**, court types `COMMON` and `CONSTITUTIONAL_TRIBUNAL`. 540,338 × 3,067 = 1.66B words → **~4.4B tokens**. Using the median instead, to guard against long-tail skew, still gives ~2.75B. Either way this is **larger than any shard currently in the corpus**. `src/fetch_saos.py` already exists (uncommitted as of this date) and documents the legal basis: judgments are *materiały urzędowe* outside copyright under art. 4 pkt 2 pr. aut., redistributed by SAOS (CeON/ICM UW + Fundacja ePaństwo) through a bulk-dump API built for exactly this. Open question before building: judgments are court-anonymised, but that should be **verified on sampled text**, not assumed — this is the one candidate here where personal data is a live risk rather than a formality. Cost of shipping it: legal/official goes from **48% to roughly 65%** of the corpus. That is the trade, and it should be a deliberate decision rather than a side effect of it being the easy build. ### FineWeb-2 Polish — only billion-scale contemporary prose `datasets-server` size endpoint, config `pol_Latn`: **152,003,298 rows / 225.9 GB**. At the measured 0.367 tokens/char that is **~83B tokens raw**. License `odc-by`. Same argument shape as the accepted HPLT basis: the packaging is licensed, the underlying web text is not owned by the publisher. Note that ODC-By is **attribution-required**, unlike HPLT's CC0 — a different obligation shape, and it has to be stated in the datasheet. #### Dedup is not the bottleneck — this was checked, not assumed The obvious worry is overlap with the existing HPLT shard, since both derive from Common Crawl. It is the *smallest* of the problems: - The existing HPLT shard is **1.6M docs against FineWeb-2's 152M**. Even total overlap removes ~1% of candidates (~12% if working from the HQ subset below). - **Internal dedup is already done upstream.** The schema carries `minhash_cluster_size`, i.e. FineWeb-2 ran MinHash per language before release. Cross-dedup against HPLT is still worth doing for hygiene, and the repo still has no committed near-dedup tooling — but it is not what makes this source expensive. #### The actual blocker: the HPLT gate cannot be ported FineWeb-2 `pol_Latn` columns are: ``` text, id, dump, url, date, file_path, language, language_score, language_script, minhash_cluster_size, top_langs ``` `src/clean_hplt_v3.py` filters on **WDS quality score, register class (ID/OP/HI/IN/NA), and MT-probability**. *None of those exist in FineWeb-2.* Every signal the existing web pipeline depends on is absent, so "filter it like we filtered HPLT" is not an option — it would mean building quality classification over 152M documents from scratch. #### `epfml/FineWeb2-HQ` — the better target A published quality-filtered derivative, config `pol_Latn`: - **13,384,885 rows**, `odc-by`, 180.4 GB parquet (size dominated by an `embeddings` column, not text). - Adds a **`quality_score`** column, retained per document, so the selection threshold stays a tunable knob instead of a baked-in decision — and the classifier is someone else's published work, which is easier to cite than a home-grown one. - Sampled 880 docs across 22 evenly-spread offsets: **mean 2,663 chars/doc** → ~13.1B tokens for the whole HQ subset. Larger than the entire current corpus. #### quality_score → token yield Distribution from the `statistics` endpoint (computed on a **partial 407,184-row sample**, not all 13.4M): min 0.013, max 0.9999, mean 0.145, **median 0.0496** — heavily right-skewed, so most of HQ still scores low. Doc fractions from that histogram, mean lengths from the 880-doc sample: | `quality_score` ≥ | % docs | docs | mean chars | est. tokens | |---|---:|---:|---:|---:| | 0.00 (all) | 100% | 13,384,885 | 2,663 | **13.1B** | | 0.11 | 31.0% | 4,149,000 | 2,375 | **3.6B** | | 0.21 | 20.0% | 2,677,000 | 2,074 | **2.0B** | | 0.31 | 14.6% | 1,954,000 | 1,929 | **1.4B** | | 0.41 | 11.1% | 1,486,000 | 1,912 | **1.0B** | | 0.51 | 8.5% | 1,138,000 | 1,798 | **0.75B** | | 0.70 | 4.8% | 642,000 | 1,750 | **0.41B** | | 0.90 | 1.8% | 241,000 | 914 | **0.08B** | A second pass computing fractions directly from the 880-doc sample agreed with these within ~15%. Treat them as ±20%, good enough to pick a threshold. **Watch out: `quality_score` anti-correlates with document length.** Mean length falls from 2,663 chars at no threshold to 914 at ≥0.90. The classifier is not rewarding long-form prose, so raising the threshold costs more tokens than the doc-count alone implies, and it may actively select *against* the extended prose this corpus is short on. Sample the text at whatever threshold is chosen before committing to it. #### Recommended operating point **Threshold ≈ 0.20 → ~2.7M docs, ~2.0–2.3B tokens.** Comparable to the largest existing shards (`european_hplt_v3_pl` 2.56B, `eurlex` 2.38B) and it *improves* the balance rather than wrecking it: web goes 26% → ~41%, legal drops 48% → ~39%. Taking all 13.1B instead would put the corpus at ~22.7B with **web at ~69%** — trading "two-thirds legalese" for "two-thirds crawl". Same failure, different axis. #### Work order if this is built 1. Pick HQ vs full, and a `quality_score` threshold (see above). 2. **Build the PII scrub.** `sources.py` already claims one for the HPLT shard that has no implementing code in `src/`; shipping a second web source with the same gap is indefensible. 3. Near-dedup against the existing HPLT shard — needed, but ~1–12% effect. 4. Compute. Tokenizing billions of tokens is the genuinely expensive step. ### PleIAs/Polish-PD — good on paper, rough in practice 68,176 rows. Sampled `word_count` at four offsets (n=200): **mean 10,971 words, median 8,468** → ~0.75B words → **~2.0B tokens**. Columns are `identifier`, `file`, `title`, `creator`, `language`, `word_count`, `character_count`, `complete_text`. Public domain, pre-1884 monographs and periodicals, largely sourced from Polish digital libraries (`jbc.bj.uj.edu.pl` in the sample). Register-wise this is the most attractive of the three — books and periodicals, against a corpus that is only 1.9% literature. But the OCR is bad. First sampled record (an 1817 newspaper) opens: ``` U RUSKI czwaRTEŁ SONAER 5 PC Nę R WIADOMOŚC ``` with pre-1884 orthography throughout (`Nayiaśnieyszy`, `roskazać`, `klassy`). **The existing OCR gate will not catch this.** `build_dynaword.py` applies `MIN_ALPHA_RATIO = 0.70` when `is_ocr: True`, which tests the ratio of letters to symbols. Garbled *words* made of ordinary letters pass it cleanly. Filtering this source needs a dictionary- or perplexity-based check, which does not exist here. Treat the 2.0B as nominal; real usable yield is materially lower. ### HPLT is exhausted — correction to an earlier assumption `https://data.hplt-project.org/three/sorted/pol_Latn/` lists **exactly 19 shards**: `10_1`, `9_1`–`9_4`, `8_1`–`8_6`, `7_1`–`7_4`, `6_1`–`6_2`, `5_1`–`5_2`. **There are no WDS bins below 5 for Polish.** `sources.py` records 17 of those as ingested. The only unused shards are **`8_5` (24.24 GB)** and **`8_6` (7.37 GB)** — roughly 230M tokens at the post-filter rate implied by the existing shard. So "add more HPLT bins" is not a path to billions. It is one small top-up, and then the source is finished. ### Conclusion Every clean billion-scale Polish source is **legal, official, or archaic** — which follows directly from what falls outside copyright. The only billion-scale contemporary general prose is web crawl, and that is a re-derivation of Common Crawl the corpus already draws on. If the goal is raw scale: SAOS. If the goal is a corpus that is not two-thirds legalese, **there is no billion-scale option**, and the honest plan is a number of 50–200M-token sources across different registers. --- ## common_voice_pl — Common Voice Polish validated sentences (v26.0) **Investigated** — 2026-09-05 (review round 2026-09-29). **Verdict** — `added` with a **unit caveat** (proposed with `release: None`, merge blocked on a maintainer unit decision). 45,043 unique validated speech prompts / 995k `cl100k_base` tokens, CC0-1.0, from Mozilla Common Voice Scripted Speech 26.0 (Polish). **Enumeration** — official dataset record on Mozilla Data Collective (, id `cmqinmu2a00winq07gyrtri0q`, release 2026-06-12), read via a pinned row mirror with DuckDB column projection (the 4.48 GB audio is never pulled). 138,798 validated clip rows -> 45,043 unique normalized sentences (91,198 repeated clips collapsed; 2,538 too-short and 19 too-long rows rejected). **License evidence** — verified AT THE ORIGIN: the MDC dataset record's license field is "Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal (CC0-1.0)", and the same `license`/`license_url` ride along per source row (build rejects non-CC0 rows). **Terms covenant**: MDC Terms of Use (Data Consumer License, clause viii) prohibit re-identifying individual contributors/sources — carried to downstream users in the datasheet and registry. **Blockers** — (1) **unit decision**: every doc is a single speech prompt (min 12 / median 56 / max 153 chars; 0 docs reach the 200-char corpus gate, no concatenation exists) — accept sentence units with a per-source gate override + training cap, or withdraw as unit-incompatible; (2) before release: NERGAL pass (full-shard residual scan was clean — 0 contacts across 45,043 docs — but the prompts are user-contributed speech material). **Lesson** — speech corpora's natural unit (the prompt sentence) is smaller than a pretraining corpus's document gate; measure the length distribution BEFORE promising the source, and keep the unit question in the PR description up front — it is the first thing a reviewer will ask. --- ## sejm_interpellations — 10th-term written Q&A (interpellations + replies) **Investigated** — 2026-09-05 (review round 2026-09-28). **Verdict** — `added` (proposed with `release: None`). 25,950 documents / 28.2M `cl100k_base` tokens of written MP questions and ministry replies — argumentative administrative prose, a register the floor-speech shards do not carry. **Enumeration** — `GET /sejm/term10/interpellations` and `.../writtenQuestions` plus `/reply/{key}/body` on api.sejm.gov.pl (the endpoints the 2026-08-27 "hold — recheck" entry above could not confirm; they exist and page fine). PDF-only replies (`onlyAttachment`) and keyless stubs skipped. Term 9 returned `X-Total-Count: 0`; terms 7–8 skipped (PPC covers through 2019). **License evidence** — same basis as `sejm_api`: Copyright Act art. 4(2) () + Open Data Act arts. 2(12), 5, 14, 17 (). No CC grant claimed. **Blockers** — none to merge with `release: None`. Before release: **NERGAL pass** — interpellations name private constituents (constituent letters and citizen cases are quoted in questions), which is exactly the case the old `scrub_pii` (#20) could not cover and #38 moved out of this repo. Caveats for the card: single term (10th), private citizens named. **Lesson** — the header chrome (nr / recipient / title / signatories / date) belongs in meta, not text: stripping it makes the body comparable across question and reply docs, and the before/after is the fastest reviewer evidence for any Sejm HTML source. --- ## Edukacja Medialna — media-literacy lessons (`edukacja_medialna_pl`) **Investigated** — 2026-09-06 (review round 2026-09-28). **Verdict** — `added`. 252 records / 728,987 `cl100k_base` tokens of CC BY-SA 3.0 lesson materials — small, but a school-teaching register nothing else in the corpus covers. **Enumeration** — lists every lesson (255 at fetch). Each lesson page carries its source XML: a `utwor` document with Dublin Core fields and the authored `powiesc` body. `src/build_edukacja_medialna_pl.py` fetches page + XML, checksums both (`page_sha256`, `xml_sha256`) and builds from the pinned `artifacts/raw_xml.jsonl.gz`; nothing else is needed. **License evidence** — verified at the origin (the mirror is not evidence for itself): every lesson page ends with `Licencja: Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa - Na tych samych warunkach 3.0` linking (e.g. ), the site footer repeats the grant (), and the source XML carries `dc:rights` + `dc:rights.license`. The build gate requires the statement on page AND XML. Per-record `rights`/`rights_urls` and hashes are pinned in `attribution.jsonl`. **Blockers** — none to merge with `release: None`. Before a release: NERGAL pass (the in-build redaction is e-mail/labelled-phone patterns only — 1 match), cross-source exact/near dedup, benchmark-overlap check, and maintainer review of embedded third-party excerpts and of the corpus-level BY-SA 3.0 treatment (proposal in the datasheet: per-record attribution + share-alike note, adaptation released under CC BY-SA 4.0). **Lesson** — cite the license where the publisher states it (per-lesson `Licencja:` line + XML rights fields), never a mirror. Pin the statement with `page_sha256`/`rights_urls` so it survives site redesigns. --- ## ted_pl — TED Polish public-procurement notices **Investigated** — 2026-09-08 (review round 2026-09-28). **Verdict** — `added` (proposed with `release: None`). 15,544 notices / 42.5M `cl100k_base` tokens of Polish administrative/technical procurement prose (2023-02-15 – 2024-05-15). **Enumeration** — 20,588 official TED Search API records for Polish-labelled notices (1,255 via official XML fallback); the PleIAs mirror is a pinned identifier index only (its Polish preview carries U+FFFD damage). Narrative fields rebuilt from API, structured contact/address/person blocks excluded by construction. **License evidence** — TED legal notice (): procurement notices freely reusable commercially/non-commercially unless otherwise noted; metadata CC0 (separate grant). Legal instrument behind it: **Commission Decision 2011/833/EU on the reuse of Commission documents** (). Text recorded as `LicenseRef-TED-Notice-Reuse`, not relabelled CC0. **Blockers** — none to merge with `release: None`. Before release: NERGAL pass and per-notice legal-exception review — the 60-record spot check found **one real residual contact** (`ted_pl_188212-2024`: "A.Decem - 815384157" — name + unlabelled phone the patterns missed) and free-text names are un-scoped beyond the sample. Text overlap with `uzp_orzeczenia_pl` is negligible (0.085% chars, 0 paragraphs — shared statutory citations), so ordinary cross-source dedup suffices. **Lesson** — unlabelled phone numbers beside personal names defeat label-anchored patterns (same lesson as `open_icm_pl`'s glyph noise): a zero pattern count is not evidence in contact-bearing registers — run the spot check and the model scrubber. --- ## kultura_bez_barier_pl — cultural-accessibility guides (FKzB) **Investigated** — 2026-09-07 (review round 2026-09-28). **Verdict** — `added` (proposed with `release: None`). 9 guides / 218k `cl100k_base` tokens (316 pages) of prepared didactic Polish for cultural-sector accessibility work - tiny, but a clean CC BY-SA 3.0 source with preserved raw PDFs and per-record evidence. **Enumeration** — the foundation's catalogue : 12 linked publications discovered, 9 retained. 3 rejected conservatively: 2 NIMOZ co-published volumes (PDF copyright notices name the third-party institute) and 1 for legacy-font extraction damage. **License evidence** — the catalogue's own statement (quoted in the datasheet) offers the foundation-authored publications under CC BY-SA 3.0 with attribution and share-alike terms; reading is catalogue-level ("plik pierwotny"), pictograms explicitly included, no per-PDF embedded assertion claimed. Per-record corroboration: PDF metadata + credit lines; `attribution.jsonl` pins the evidence URL and scope note. **Blockers** — none to merge with `release: None`. Before release: NERGAL pass — the all-9 spot check found **real residual contacts** in `podsumowanie_wizyt_studyjnych` (coordinator names + phones under `Tel./SMS` label variants the pattern misses, e-mails beside them redacted) — and maintainer sign-off on the catalogue-level scope reading. **Lesson** — catalogue-level license statements need the reading written down (what "je" covers), and the safest per-record confirmation is negative: reject every item with third-party authorship signals, as this PR does with the NIMOZ volumes. Also: `Tel./SMS`-style label variants defeat label-anchored phone patterns — third independent pattern-evasion case in this review round. --- ## plwiki_talk — Polish Wikipedia talk pages (ns 1+5) **Investigated** — 2026-09-11 (review round 2026-09-28). **Verdict** — `added` (proposed with `release: None`). 43,054 pages / 55.6M `cl100k_base` tokens of **user-generated** editorial discussion — article talk (ns 1, 41,828 pages) and project talk (ns 5, 1,226 pages). Exact namespace complement to `wikipedia` (ns 0) and `plwiki_user_talk` (ns 3). **Enumeration** — the same pinned `plwiki-20260901-pages-meta-current` dump as the ns-3 slice (7 sha1-verified shards); 544,591 non-redirect talk pages enumerated, 43,054 retained after QA/dedup (500,652 dropped as <500 chars). **License evidence** — Wikimedia Terms of Use section 7 (CC BY-SA 4.0): . Per-record canonical URL + page history is the attribution trail. **Blockers** — none to merge with `release: None`. Before release: NERGAL pass (user-generated talk; a 60-record residual spot check found only a DOI false positive and public signatures, but free text can hide more), and text-level cross-shard dedup per the measured overlap with `plwiki_user_talk` / `wikipedia` (review thread). **Lesson** — namespace partitioning prevents page-level duplication but not text-level repetition: talk pages quote article text and share templated notices across namespaces. Measure overlap at text level before claiming novelty — the ID-only audit said "0 collisions" and proved nothing. --- ## plwiki_user_talk — Polish Wikipedia user talk, ns 3 **Investigated** — 2026-09-11 (review round 2026-09-28). **Verdict** — `added` (proposed with `release: None`). 380,527 records / 381.4M `cl100k_base` tokens of **user-generated** editor-to-editor conversation — a register the corpus otherwise does not draw from. **Enumeration** — official dump `plwiki-20260901-pages-meta-current`, 7 sha1-verified shards against `dumpstatus.json`; ns=3 non-redirect pages with text = 450,867 candidates. Rebuilt deterministically by `src/build_plwiki_usertalk_pl.py` from the pinned shards. **License evidence** — Wikimedia Terms of Use section 7 (community content under CC BY-SA 4.0): (verified, HTTP 200). Per-record canonical page URL + page history is the attribution trail, pinned in `attribution.jsonl` (380,527 lines, LFS). **Blockers** — none to merge with `release: None`. Before release: a NERGAL pass (user-generated conversation is the policy's core case; the in-build redaction is patterns only and a 60-record residual spot check found 0 hits but covers 0.016%), and cross-shard cleanup against `plwiki_talk` for 47 shared long notice lines (99.3% of the measured ns3↔ns1/5 line overlap; genuine thread copies are ~0.13% of user-talk chars). **Lesson** — text-level overlap audits beat ID audits: the ID comparison reported "0 collisions", the text pass found 28.7% char containment against `plwiki_talk` — 99.3% of it just 47 template/notice lines shared across namespaces. Also: line-level boilerplate rules need their length cap revisited (the <160-char rule lets long templated notices survive in both corpora). --- ## open_agh_chemistry_pl — Open AGH chemistry textbooks **Investigated** — 2026-09-05 (review round 2026-09-28). **Verdict** — `added` (proposed with `release: None`). 370 modules / 564k `cl100k_base` tokens from four Polish AGH chemistry textbooks (general, inorganic, polymer, corrosion) — didactic LaTeX-bearing prose. **Enumeration** — the AGH e-textbook platform (); 374 modules discovered, 370 retained (each with a selection decision). Pinned snapshot `PiotrSty/open-agh-chemistry-pl@07d38bfd` with raw module HTML. **License evidence** — verified AT THE ORIGIN: each book's official EPUB rights page (served by AGH at `/rpc/preview/handbooks/{id}/epub/light`, preserved verbatim with `rights_sha256` in `books.json`) states "Publikacja udostępniona jest na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie Autorstwa - Na tych samych warunkach 4.0…" with attribution terms and a "Wersja oryginalna" marking requirement. Per-book, not catalogue-level — the strong pattern. **Blockers** — none to merge with `release: None`. Before release: NERGAL pass (two-pattern redaction only; the 60-record spot check was clean — DOIs only), cross-source dedup and benchmark checks. **Lesson** — repo hygiene findings worth keeping: (1) `sources.py` line endings — `main`'s own blob is CRLF today, so the AGENTS.md "commit LF" rule as written would CREATE whole-file rewrites; the minimal-diff rule is "match main", and the repo-wide normalization is maintainer work; (2) the entry shipped without `added`/`release` — the registry contract check belongs in the contract test. --- ## openstax_pl — OpenStax Poland textbooks (8 volumes) **Investigated** — 2026-09-05 (review round 2026-09-28). **Verdict** — `added` (proposed with `release: None`). 1,422 pages / 4.63M `cl100k_base` tokens of Polish academic textbook prose (physics ×3, psychology, micro/macro, marketing, nutrition) — **human translations of the English OpenStax originals** by named academics. **Enumeration** — openstax.org book containers (Rex/Connexions HTML) via openstax.pl catalog; 1,612 pages discovered, 1,422 retained (each with a decision; MathML-conversion failures rejected). Pinned snapshot `PiotrSty/openstax-pl-textbooks@5b31f74e`. **License evidence** — verified AT THE ORIGIN per book: each Polish edition's foreword page (openstax.org/books//pages/przedmowa) states the CC BY 4.0 grant with the attribution condition "uznania autorstwa OpenStax i osób podpisanych pod oryginałem"; links per book in the datasheet/PR, excerpts + sha256 preserved in `books.json`. **Blockers** — none to merge with `release: None`. Before release: NERGAL pass (two-pattern redaction only; spot check of 60 was fully clean), cross-source dedup and benchmark checks (exercises/tables may reference omitted figures). **Lesson** — for translated editions, "by whom" is a licensable-quality question: the foreword credits (named translators per chapter) are the evidence — pin them per record (`edition_contributors`) instead of asserting "translated" in the abstract. Same for MT: state its absence explicitly when the credits are human. --- ## wiadomosci_statystyczne_pl — Wiadomości Statystyczne / The Polish Statistician (GUS) **Investigated** — 2026-09-10 (review round 2026-09-28). **Verdict** — `added` (proposed with `release: None`). 169 articles / 1.5M `cl100k_base` tokens of peer-reviewed statistics-journal content (research, statistics history, conference reports, obituaries) — small, but a formal academic register with a hard per-article license gate. **Enumeration** — deterministic crawl of the server-rendered `https://ws.stat.gov.pl/` `/Archives` index: 460 articles (2022+), 315 with the explicit per-article CC BY-SA 4.0 line, 194 acquired, 182 after QA/dedup, minus 13 exact title/DOI matches against `biblioteka_nauki` -> 169. **License evidence** — GUS journals under CC BY-SA 4.0 since 2022-01-01 () AND a verbatim per-article "udostępniony na licencji CC BY-SA 4.0" line on each landing page (preserved HTML snapshots in the source repo; the line also appears in the PDF text). Pre-2022 articles show only the site-wide footer and are excluded — that archive's license status is unresolved. **Blockers** — none to merge with `release: None`. Before release: NERGAL pass (pattern redaction covers e-mail/labelled-phone only; a 60-record spot check found just DOIs/ORCIDs, but case-study text can hide more) and cross-source text dedup (the 13 exclusions were metadata-level title/DOI matches only). **Lesson** — the per-article license line kept verbatim in the record text makes the grant self-evidencing in the corpus itself — worth copying for other publishers that stamp each article. --- ## sejm_committee_transcripts — Sejm committee full transcripts (terms 9–10) **Investigated** — 2026-09-18 (review round 2026-09-28). **Verdict** — `added` (proposed with `release: None`). 653,411 speaker turns / 166.3M `cl100k_base` tokens of spoken multi-party committee discussion — a working register the plenary-only political sources do not cover. **Enumeration** — api.sejm.gov.pl: `GET /sejm/term{n}/committees` and `.../sittings`, then `.../sittings/{num}/pdf` for the "pelny zapis" transcripts. 9,175 term-9/10 sittings known; 8,658 have a zapis PDF upstream, 455 have none, 62 failed after retries; 7,746 sittings survive joint-sitting dedup. **License evidence** — official parliamentary materials: Copyright Act art. 4(2) () + Open Data/PSI Act arts. 2(12), 5, 6, 14, 15, 17 (). No CC grant claimed; evidence snapshot in `sejm_committee_transcripts.license-evidence.json`. **Blockers** — none to merge with `release: None`. Before release: NERGAL pass (454 pattern redactions cover only e-mail/PESEL/NIP/REGON/labelled phone/IBAN; quoted citizens' statements remain), near-dedup vs `dziennik_ustaw`/`eurlex` (embedded statute/print quotations), benchmark-overlap check. **Lesson** — `pdftotext -layout` + role-anchored speaker labels reconstruct turns well (98.9% of the ASW pilot's audited corrected characters), but it is the pilot comparison that makes the reconstruction auditable — keep that step for future spoken sources. --- ## Studia BAS — Kancelaria Sejmu research & public-policy journal (2021–2025) **Investigated:** 2026-08-29 **Verdict:** `ready` — official open-access transition under **CC BY 3.0 PL** starting with issue **2(66)/2021**; verified per-article license statements and clean born-digital PDF text layer. Quarterly peer-reviewed journal published by the **Biuro Analiz Sejmowych (BAS)** of the Chancellery of the Sejm (Kancelaria Sejmu). Focuses on public policy, socio-economic research, constitutional and EU law, public finance, and legislative commentary. Provides contemporary, formal academic/policy analysis prose — a critical register bridging official administrative/legal texts and general expository literature without being raw statutory legalese or web crawl. ### Archive enumeration & fetch route — verified - **Archive URL:** `https://studiabas.sejm.gov.pl/journal.nsf/pubBAS.xsp?view=12&seria=4&lang=PL` - **Enumeration:** The Lotus Domino / XPages archive portal uses dynamic AJAX updates. Querying issues by year (2021–2025) requires parsing the initial `xspForm` state (`$$viewid`, `$$ajaxid`, `cbYear`) and submitting multipart POST requests. - **PDF Resolution:** Issue records point to download endpoints on `orka.sejm.gov.pl` (either direct issue PDF paths or the download-counting agent `LiczOpen?OpenAgent&`). - **WAF / Network:** `studiabas.sejm.gov.pl` is fronted by Imperva WAF, requiring browser-like TLS handshakes (`curl_cffi` impersonating Chrome) for reliable programmatic querying and retrieval. ### License evidence — verified cutoff from issue 2(66)/2021 - **Historical cutoff:** Issues 1–65 (prior to 2/2021) were published under traditional all-rights-reserved copyright. - **Open-access grant:** Starting with issue **2(66)/2021** (issue 66), the journal officially transitioned to open access under **Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Poland (CC BY 3.0 PL / `CC-BY-3.0-PL`)**. - **Dual-gate verification:** Ingestion enforces a hard issue boundary (`issue >= 66`) and additionally validates the presence of the explicit CC BY 3.0 PL statement inside every article PDF (*"Artykuł został udostępniony na licencji Creative Commons – Uznanie Autorstwa 3.0 Polska (CC BY 3.0 PL)"*). Issues or articles lacking this statement fail closed. ### PDF characteristics, text extraction & non-OCR status - **Born-digital PDFs (`is_ocr: False`):** Whole-issue PDFs feature high-fidelity digital text layers, not scanned or OCR-derived text. - **Article segmentation:** Multi-article issue PDFs are sliced at article title pages identified via title font size (`max_size >= 12`), registered DOI (`10.31268/StudiaBAS.YYYY.NN`), and the in-PDF CC BY license block. - **Layout normalization:** - Running headers (page numbering, journal title, ISSN `2082-0658`, `studiabas.sejm.gov.pl`) and author affiliation footnote blocks are stripped from the main body. - PDF line-break hyphenation is reconstructed for Polish compounds (e.g. `przedsię-\nbiorców`, `rolno-\n-spożywczy`). - Paragraph breaks are preserved and reconstructed using vertical spacing, indentation, and heading font shifts. - **Polish scope:** Ingestion extracts the Polish title, Polish abstract (*Streszczenie*), Polish keywords (*Słowa kluczowe*), and full Polish article body. Incidental English titles/abstracts (*Abstract*, *Keywords*) in dual-language front matter are excluded from the main text. ### Observed yield (2021–2025) - **Extracted articles:** **115 articles** across issues 66 to 81 (2021–2025). - **Retained articles:** **112 articles** after dropping 3 entirely English-language articles. - **Token volume:** ~112 long-form scholarly articles yielding ~0.8–1.2M tokens of dense, high-register Polish analytical prose. ### Author, affiliation & PII handling - **Scholarly attribution:** Lead and contributing author names and DOIs are preserved in document metadata (`author`, `doi`, `source_url`) as official academic attribution. - **PII scrubbing:** Author email addresses, ORCID identifiers (`orcid.org/0000-...`), phone numbers, and national identifiers (PESEL, NIP, REGON) appearing in contact blocks or bios are systematically scrubbed and replaced with stable `[PII]` tokens, preserving sentence syntax. ### Inclusion rationale & quality/bias caveats - **Inclusion rationale:** High-quality, editorially reviewed policy research and academic discourse with unambiguous CC BY 3.0 PL licensing, permanent DOI provenance, and zero OCR noise. Fills a major gap in formal analytical Polish. - **Quality & bias caveats:** - Institutional focus: Content is oriented toward state policy, parliamentary advisory topics, economics, and legal regulation. - Complex formatting: Rare multi-column tables, statistical charts, or boxed exhibits in PDFs may yield minor layout artifacts or omitted figure captions. ### Cross-source exact dedup — verified 2026-08-31 - All 112 released `studia_bas` texts are internally unique. - Full byte-for-byte text comparison against 4,366,651 documents in all 20 other local Parquets found **0 exact-text matches**. - No `studia_bas` record required removal. A future rebuild of `biblioteka_nauki` still needs cross-source dedup because its current upstream catalogue exposes 105 of these articles even though the released local shard does not contain them. --- ## open_icm_pl — OPEN ICM open-access publications (pilot) **Investigated** — 2026-09-10 (review round 2026-09-28). **Verdict** — `added` (proposed with `release: None`). 85 publications / 2.36M `cl100k_base` tokens — a deterministic 100-record pilot of the OPEN ICM repository (ICM UW). Small on purpose: yields must not be extrapolated to the 6,183 eligible items. **Enumeration** — official DSpace API (`/server/api/core/items`), fail-closed license/language gate; repository-generated TEXT bitstreams (MD5-verified) fetched after the origin's interactive CAPTCHA. 100 acquired -> 95 after QA -> 85 after removing 10 exact title/DOI matches against `biblioteka_nauki`. **License evidence** — verified AT THE ORIGIN: per-item `dc.rights` + `dc.rights.uri` in the portal's item metadata (example: "Uznanie autorstwa 3.0 Polska" -> creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/pl/ on , also machine-readable at `/server/api/core/items/0078ca93-...`); 77 of 85 items additionally ship a per-item `license.txt` bitstream (checksum-pinned). Allowlist: CC BY / CC BY-SA only (3.0-PL / 3.0 / 4.0); NC and "dozwolony użytek" rejected. **Blockers** — none to merge with `release: None`. Before release: NERGAL pass - the residual spot check FOUND one glyph-garbled contact the patterns missed (`JKolbusz @wsiz.rzeszow.pl` in `open_icm_pl_6ec903ca-...`); extraction noise defeats pattern matching, so the model-based scrubber is the real gate. Also cross-source text dedup (the 10 exclusions were metadata-level) and review of quoted third-party passages. **Lesson** — (1) pattern scrubbers fail on PDF-extraction glyph noise - always spot-check noisy sources, a "0 residual" pattern count is not evidence; (2) CAPTCHA-gated origins are reproducible only via pinned checksums, not re-fetch - say so in the datasheet instead of pretending a before/after can be regenerated.