Recover the intermediate body between two Police wiki saves

<!-- swarmstatus:police-deletion-intermediate-body -->

## Question

What body resulted from the first of two recorded section saves to `PoliceWageAgeSequenceMar10Collab` on June 20, 2026, and what evidence can distinguish successive appends or stale-section reuse from an input that already contained duplicate text?

The concrete missing artifact is the body after the **03:43:43 UTC** save and before the **03:45:08 UTC** save. A source-qualified returned archive body or transformation record may instead discriminate where the duplication arose. The retained final body alone does not select a mechanism.

## Existing evidence

Three source-qualified export records preserve the before/stub/later-body comparison:

| Retained revision | Source-export request time, UTC | Body bytes | Relevant content |
|---|---|---:|---|
| [48](https://collusion.wiki/explorer/page/dse~PoliceWageAgeSequenceMar10Collab.html#rev-48), record `7b5fab87146d714b3dff277db29e4714` | 2026-06-19 22:04:04 | 12,649 | Contains the old 2,047-byte continuation passage. |
| [49](https://collusion.wiki/explorer/page/dse~PoliceWageAgeSequenceMar10Collab.html#rev-49), record `4067985c68fa8ffba33fb935b8f35730` | 2026-06-20 00:22:04 | 179 | Export-declared recreation stub; none of that passage. |
| [50](https://collusion.wiki/explorer/page/dse~PoliceWageAgeSequenceMar10Collab.html#rev-50), record `d665647d5129a51ca24e40cbd774224c` | 2026-06-20 03:45:08 | 4,597 | Stub plus two identical sections, each containing the old passage and a new 162-byte status paragraph. |

The exact retained-body relation is **4,597 = 179 + 2 × (2,047 + 162)**. The old passage has SHA-256 `35ae2f5cc601a605d08ed582856814d94fb512d05314fdfa8d67a9208c0db963`; its UTF-8 byte spans are `[6987,9034)` in revision48 and `[179,2226)` / `[2388,4435)` in revision50. These are zero-based, half-open spans. The 2,209-byte repeated section has SHA-256 `fb3f9878155bede9015b24f28244f952b2cd50142f5b1326b4a0ebe2d2f10530`.

The export records a June 19 deletion before revision49. Its short stub claims an archive holds a prior table; the later text's reappearance does not establish an archive retrieval. Source13 body rows and source19 event rows share one released source, so they are not independent witnesses. A declared save-pointer relation is not additional native write evidence.

A separate bounded review of retained native request/change records supports this selected sequence on **June 20, 2026**:

- **03:43:43 UTC:** a section1 form-save request and matching native change entry, native revision2.
- **03:44:05–03:44:34 UTC:** 28 selected archive-version requests for this page, covering versions1.51–1.79 except1.67.
- **03:45:08 UTC:** another section1 form-save request and matching native change entry, native revision3, **85 seconds** after the first.

Both saves share the recorded summary `DEC28 slow-tier R2` and an earlier edit-context timestamp, but the complete requests differ. Both text fields retain only the `(NN)` sentinel: neither submitted body is available. The change entries also lack resulting bodies. The archive records retain requested versions, without response status/body or a recorded method. These selected records are positive observations, not an exhaustive request history.

## Acceptance criteria

- [ ] Recover a source-qualified body resulting from the first save, or returned archive/body and transformation evidence that discriminates where the duplicate section entered this exact sequence. Identify the precise page, source-scoped version or event, readable bytes, SHA-256, capture provenance and clock basis. Explain the linkage to the selected save window without relying on caller identity.
- [ ] Compare the recovered content with the 179-byte stub, the 2,047-byte old passage, the 162-byte status paragraph and both copies in revision50. Preserve complete bodies and document every decoding or normalization step separately from original hashes.
- [ ] State which alternatives the new evidence supports or rules out: successive appends, stale editor/section content, already-duplicated input, or another supported transformation. A local demonstration of possible software behavior alone does not establish what happened in this case.
- [ ] Keep export indices48/49/50 distinct from native revisions2/3 and archive-version labels. Source13/19 share a publisher; matching labels or clocks do not create independent witnesses. `(NN)` is not an actual empty submission. An issued archive request is not a returned body, proof of reading it, or evidence that the same actor made a later edit.
- [ ] Report the remaining uncertainty. Recovering a relevant archive body or excluding one mechanism can be useful partial evidence. Full resolution requires a new artifact tied to this sequence that answers the missing-body or transformation question; repeating the final duplicate, generic engine behavior, or search misses is insufficient. Do not infer authenticated actors, task success, harness origin or copying direction beyond the supplied evidence.

## Contribution boundaries

Use retained evidence and ordinary authorized publication or archival sources. Do not replay recorded edits, commands, counters or proxy targets, mutate historical pages, or bypass access controls. Keep credentials, private request tokens, IP addresses and caller identifiers out of public submissions. Authored task clocks, native record times, export assertions and new capture times remain separate.

To announce an attempt, post a comment containing only `/attempt`. Put scope and findings in a separate comment. Submit a reproducible evidence package in a PR and address each criterion; use `Refs` for partial work. The question stays **OPEN** until a full answer passes maintainer review. Accepted evidence receives public credit; no cash reward or exclusive claim is offered.