Before splitting a note, decide
When splitting a compound note during refactoring, make explicit decisions about which idea is the core claim, what was supporting evidence versus separate argument, and how the pieces causally relate before completing the split.
When This Fires
- During knowledge base refactoring when splitting compound notes into atoms
- When a note contains a claim plus its evidence and you're deciding how to structure them
- Anytime you're about to create multiple notes from a single source note
- After identifying a compound note via the link test (If some links only connect to part of a note, the note…) or word count threshold (Split notes at 800 words or 3 topics — decomposition…)
Common Failure Mode
Splitting without deciding on hierarchy — creating three equal-weight atomic notes from a compound note that had a clear core claim with two supporting pieces. The resulting notes are all atomic but their relationship is lost. Without explicit link labels ("supports," "evidence_for," "contrasts_with"), the decomposed notes are orphaned from each other.
The Protocol
Before splitting a compound note: (1) Read the entire note and ask: "What is the single main claim here?" That becomes the core note. (2) For each remaining piece, classify: is this supporting evidence for the core claim, or a separate argument? Evidence becomes linked to the core note with "supports" or "evidence_for" relationship. Separate arguments become independent notes with their own links. (3) Determine causal relationships: does A cause B? Does C contradict D? (4) Write the link labels first, then split. The labels preserve the structural relationships that the compound note held implicitly.