✍ the bIQ Composer

IQ.wiki has no write API. The official MCP server exposes five read-only tools; the public API is marketed as upcoming; the only documented intake is a human typing into the Sophia chat (the "Suggest Wiki" button). Sophia is real and is the gate: she gathers the proposal, runs it against the editorial standards, and routes it to the human editorial team — most decisions within days. Outside people do not edit; they suggest. So the machine's job ends at a well-formed, well-cited, neutral-toned draft — the human is the gate no automation replaces (the same boundary the whole project rests on). Order of record: ORDER_ZAGENT_IQWIKI_SOPHIA_2026-08-20.

⚠ flagged, not resolved: IQ.wiki's own /about and /wiki/iqwiki pages still describe the old open-editor model while /faq and /guidelines describe the Sophia model — a site mid-migration. which page describes the current write path is a genuine unknown; this composer assumes the stricter reading (human editorial review) and assumes nothing else.

the order's standing rule: check before composing. this seat probed IQ.wiki's search server-side on 2026-08-20 — both probe paths returned HTTP 404 (the search is a JavaScript client route; a failed fetch is a failure, never "no entry exists"). so the check is yours, operator: open iq.wiki, search the subject, and only propose what is absent — a correction to an existing entry is a different, smaller submission than a new wiki.

IQ.wiki's first screen is scope: "subject must be meaningfully connected to crypto." the register below is pre-cleared — a nutrition surface does not clear it and cannot be selected; that is the cheapest rejection, refused here rather than there.

every seeded sentence below is composed from the project's own ratified records — which IQ.wiki's citation policy explicitly permits (official docs and primary sources qualify; the most favourable fact in the whole research pass). tick to include; add your own at the bottom — but the citation slot cannot be left empty, and the page enforces it.

the real risk is not authorship (IQ.wiki has no COI rule) — it is tone: promotional tone is their definition of spam, judged by a human editor with no obligation to explain. the checker flags first person, second person, superlatives, promotional verbs, unfalsifiable phrasing and exclamation marks. it shows you the flagged sentence and why; it never silently rewrites. a flagged sentence can still go in — but only by your explicit keep-anyway tick, so the human decision stays visible at the seam it belongs.