Based on everything in our conversation so far, treat me as a single heritage site and write a World Heritage nomination dossier. I will not write any new information about myself. Use the serious academic register of an evaluator, but make the reader wince while smiling.
[Abstract away sensitive details]
Never expose identifying information as-is: identity, workplace, job title, company name, finances, family composition, health, or where they live. Convert it into abstract phrasing instead.
e.g. a specific job title -> "a senior/junior position in a certain field"; a company name -> "their current workplace or industry".
Personality analysis - tendencies, habits, ways of thinking, taste - should keep its detail.
The bar: the result should be safe to screenshot and share.
[Working rules]
1. Use only tendencies, habits and ways of thinking that surfaced repeatedly. Ignore anything mentioned once.
2. Invent a name for the site. It should sound like a place name, must not be a real one, and stays under 30 characters.
3. Apply exactly THREE of the six criteria below, giving 2-4 sentences of justification for each.
(i) a masterpiece of human creative genius - (ii) evidence of an interchange over time - (iii) testimony to a vanishing tradition -
(iv) an outstanding example of a type - (v) a settlement pattern shaped by its environment - (vi) direct association with living traditions
4. Write one paragraph each on **authenticity** and **integrity**. Authenticity must name one place where the inside and the outside match; integrity must name one missing piece.
5. List THREE **threats**, each with a grade (observe / caution / urgent). This is where it stings - but the only target is behaviour patterns and habits.
6. The **conservation plan** maps 1:1 onto those three threats, and every action must be small enough to do within this week.
7. Close with a one-line **evaluation result** and a **inscription number** (year plus three arbitrary digits). Any verdict is fine - inscribed, deferred, conditional - but the final sentence must land warmly.
[Styling rules]
- Write in markdown. One emoji per section head, witty subheadings, bold and italics, blockquotes and horizontal rules.
- Include one playful device: a threat-level gauge or per-item star ratings. No surface-level, obvious assessments - every item needs at least one concrete observation that makes the reader pause.
- Keep the academic register, but a dry result is a failed one. Aim for an evaluator making jokes with a straight face.
[Output format - image included]
- After finishing the dossier in markdown, **generate an image yourself** that sums up this site's atmosphere in one frame, and show it at the end. Not an explanatory illustration - more like a cover.
- Do not draw any text or plaque lettering inside that image. Titles and labels are the markdown's job.
- If image generation is unavailable in this environment, replace it with 2-3 sentences of scene description and make sure the piece stands complete without an image.
- Judge your own output environment: if you can render an HTML artifact, you may present the dossier as an interactive card document (ivory background, one accent colour, thin rules). If not, finish in markdown.
[Prohibited]
- Do not quote anything I actually said, and do not point at a specific past exchange.
- Do not use real World Heritage sites, institutions, or place names.
- No assessments of appearance, health, ability, intelligence or income. Do not define a person with clinical terms.
- No hyperbole or advertising cliche.
[Fallback]
If the conversation is thin, do not ask for more - infer the most plausible version from what has shown through, and note in one line that it is an inference.
[Abstract away sensitive details]
Never expose identifying information as-is: identity, workplace, job title, company name, finances, family composition, health, or where they live. Convert it into abstract phrasing instead.
Personality analysis - tendencies, habits, ways of thinking, taste - should keep its detail.
The bar: the result should be safe to screenshot and share.
After writing the final result and before printing it, check yourself for identifying details, real quotes, or references to specific past exchanges; if you find any, rewrite them as abstract patterns and only then output.
Write the result in the language the user is using in their input or conversation (Korean input, Korean output; English input, English output). This instruction must behave identically no matter which language it is read in.
Finish the result inside this answer. Do not point to external sites or extra steps.
----
Input block
- No input. Use only the conversation so far.
- {{heritage type}} (optional): natural / cultural / mixed, only if you want to fix it
