Enrichment and suggested facts

GIG's automated enrichment passes never write straight onto a person record. What they find is submitted as an observation with its evidence attached, and a person record only changes once that observation clears a set of rules designed to never override what a human already told you. There's no separate page for this — everything happens inline, on the person's own profile, next to the field it concerns. Enrichment is a staff-only surface: contractors don't see it.

What you'll see on a profile

• A field that was filled automatically shows a dotted underline under its value. Hover it to see why: the evidence behind it, written in plain language ("their signature on 14 Jul reads..."), when it was observed, and the source.
• A field with a suggestion waiting for review shows as a muted row beneath it with a checkmark and an X. Choose the checkmark to accept the suggestion — it's written to the record immediately, replacing anything currently in that field. Choose the X to dismiss it — GIG remembers that exact value was turned down and will never suggest it again for that field, though a genuinely different value can still be suggested later.

Only an organization admin can accept or dismiss a suggestion.

Why a finding sometimes fills the field and sometimes just waits

GIG never asks whatever found the information how confident it is — a script or an import that grades its own certainty tends to be wrong in the direction that makes it look useful. Instead, GIG prices the evidence itself, and what happens next depends on both that evidence and what's already on the record:

• The field is blank. Any observation that clears GIG's minimum bar for keeping fills it — no review needed.
• You (or the person themselves) already put something there. If the person entered it themselves through their own update link, nothing found elsewhere ever overrides it — full stop. If you typed it in by hand, any later finding is only ever offered to you as a suggestion, at any confidence — GIG treats your correction as something to ask you about, not overrule.
• The field holds an earlier automated finding, and nothing else has touched it since. A new finding replaces it automatically only when GIG's evidence scoring reaches its highest confidence tier and at least one piece of evidence identifies the person directly — their own reply, their own signature, their own form submission. Anything weaker (a public web page, an imported spreadsheet row, a guess from a social handle) is queued as a suggestion instead.

A suggestion that's never acted on doesn't expire or get overwritten by a weaker later finding — the strongest pending suggestion for a field is the one you'll see.

What's deliberate here

• A person's own profile fields are never touched by this at all, for anyone whose person record is linked to a GIG profile. Name, email, phone, address, and social handles on a linked person come from their own profile, live — enrichment for those fields is refused outright, not merely queued, because writing a shadow copy into the person record would let the two silently disagree.
• A correction you make by hand outranks automation from then on, for that field. This is why a field you've edited only ever produces a suggestion afterward, never a silent overwrite — GIG treats the reviewing admin as the value's owner and asks rather than overrides.
• Dismissing a suggestion is remembered, not just closed. Turning down "Toronto" as someone's city means GIG won't offer you "Toronto" again for that field — a different city can still come up later.

What isn't answered here yet

Where enrichment observations actually come from — which automated passes run, how often, and what they look at — isn't covered on this page.