Interview Scene Template 1
Interview-scene map\nType: [x]\nInterviewer goal: [x]\nInterviewee goal: [x]\nEvidence needed: [x]\nTime/format: [x]
Start with structure, then replace every placeholder with information that is true, relevant, and natural for your context. These templates are intentionally skeletal so your final writing does not sound mass-produced.
A strong interview scene has a clear purpose and question logic rather than random interrogation. It distinguishes job, admissions, media, research, documentary, or other interview contexts; shows how answers change follow-up questions; keeps body language contextual rather than diagnostic; and researches professional rules or confidentiality where they matter.
Interview-scene map\nType: [x]\nInterviewer goal: [x]\nInterviewee goal: [x]\nEvidence needed: [x]\nTime/format: [x]
Question chain\nOpening question: [x]\nAnswer detail: [x]\nAmbiguity: [x]\nFollow-up: [x]
Flat Q&A → dynamic scene\nFlat exchange: [x]\nChanged expectation: [x]\nRevision: [x]
Fairness/research check\nBody-language inference removed?: [ ]\nProfessional rule to verify: [x]\nConfidentiality/recording issue: [x]
Purpose-and-verification decision audit for Interview Scene: real writing job → [ ]; plausible choice A → [ ]; plausible choice B → [ ]; downstream consequence of each → [ ]; facts/evidence/canon to verify → [ ]; reader or genre boundary → [ ]; final purpose-fit reason → [ ].
Publication-readiness audit for Interview Scene: claim/advice/example → [ ]; strongest available source tier → [ ]; important disagreement or uncertainty → [ ]; what would change the conclusion → [ ]; publish now / qualify / revise / hold → [ ]; final verifier or source of truth → [ ].
Provenance and classification audit for Interview Scene: draft statement/example → [ ]; classify as fact / interpretation / recommendation / convention / original example → [ ]; source or internal provenance → [ ]; source date / version / checked date → [ ]; attribution needed → [ ]; recency risk → [ ]; final publishable wording → [ ].
Source-record and update audit for Interview Scene: statement / example → [ ]; external fact, project fact, interpretation, recommendation, convention, or original example → [ ]; controlling first-party / primary source → [ ]; secondary source if used → [ ]; source record / locator → [ ]; date or version checked → [ ]; update trigger → [ ]; publish / qualify / revise / hold → [ ].
Source-ledger and revision-history audit for Interview Scene: claim / recommendation / example → [ ]; source or project record ID → [ ]; source status active / superseded / corrected / retracted / retired → [ ]; claim-level last verified date/version → [ ]; event that triggered recheck → [ ]; correction / withdrawal action → [ ]; reader-facing disclosure needed? → [ ]; what changed and why → [ ]; prior wording/version retained at → [ ].
Claim/source status audit: Item [claim/source/example] | Status [active / review due / stale / corrected / retracted / superseded] | Controlling source/version [x] | Last verified [date/version] | Stale trigger [x] | Correction severity [0–3] | Reader disclosure [none / note / correction / withdrawal] | Changelog entry [what changed + why].
Dependency and propagation audit: Claim / example / recommendation [x] | Controlling source / project record [x] | Dependency strength [direct / shared / advisory / independent] | Review trigger / reason code [x] | Needs-review scope [local / direct dependents / cluster] | Replacement source requirements [x] | Carry-forward decision [x] | Propagation targets [x] | Reader disclosure / changelog action [x].
Persistent editorial registry audit: Topic slug → [ ]; claim UID/key → [ ]; source UID/key → [ ]; dependency UID + strength → [ ]; source status/version → [ ]; open review UID/reason/priority → [ ]; replacement source if any → [ ]; reviewer + resolution → [ ].