...

... TITLE RULES: - Clear and concise. Aim for 4-9 words. - Strip noise: governing bodies, sponsor names, "tickets", "booking", year numbers, round/event numbers. - Keep the essence: what it is and where (place name) if not implied by venue. - Title-case proper nouns and event names; otherwise sentence case. - Don't invent details. Potential titles: - "The Buildings Archaeologist at The BEAT" (6 words) - but "The Buildings Archaeologist" seems like the event name/talk title. Raw title is "The Buildings Archaeologist (Bodmin)". Venue is Bosvena Events Arts Theatre (The BEAT), Bodmin. Since venue implies Bodmin, maybe I don't need Bodmin in title. But "The Buildings Archaeologist" alone is vague. Maybe "The Buildings Archaeologist Talk at The BEAT" (7 words). Or "Buildings Archaeologist Talk at The BEAT Bodmin" - a bit long. - "The Buildings Archaeologist Talk, Bodmin" (5 words). But let's see if we can make it more descriptive using the description: "Discovering the Secrets of Britain's Ancient Buildings". However, title rules say keep essence: what it is and where. - "Talk: The Buildings Archaeologist, Bodmin" (5 words). Title-case proper nouns. "The Buildings Archaeologist" seems to be the name of the talk/show. "Talk" is lowercase unless it's a proper noun? Actually, standard title case: "Talk: The Buildings Archaeologist, Bodmin" - Talk is not a proper noun, but at start of title? The rule says "Title-case proper nouns and event names; otherwise sentence case." So if it's not a proper noun, use sentence case. So: "Talk: The Buildings Archaeologist, Bodmin"? No, "Talk" would be capitalized if it's the first word? Actually sentence case means capitalize only the first word and proper nouns. But the instruction says "Title-case proper nouns and event names; otherwise sentence case." So: "The Buildings Archaeologist, Bodmin" or "Talk: the Buildings Archaeologist, Bodmin"? Hmm. Usually in sentence case for titles, you capitalize the first word and proper nouns. So "The buildings archaeologist, Bodmin"? But "The Buildings Archaeologist" might be the event name. The raw title is "The Buildings Archaeologist (Bodmin)". Let's treat "The Buildings Archaeologist" as the event name/proper noun. So: "The Buildings Archaeologist, Bodmin" (5 words). Or "The Buildings Archaeologist at the BEAT" (6 words). The venue name "The BEAT" or "Bosvena Events Arts Theatre" - "The BEAT" is the common name. But maybe keep it simple: "The Buildings Archaeologist, Bodmin". Wait, the venue is in Bodmin, so place name is already implied? The instruction says "where (place name) if not implied by venue." The venue is "Bosvena Events Arts Theatre (The BEAT), Bodmin". So venue implies Bodmin. Therefore I might not need Bodmin. But "The Buildings Archaeologist" alone is unclear. Is it a talk? A show? The description says "Discovering the Secrets of Britain's Ancient Buildings". The tags include jameswright, triskeleheritage. It seems like a talk by James Wright (The Buildings Archaeologist). So maybe: "The Buildings Archaeologist Talk at The BEAT" (7 words). Or "Buildings Archaeology Talk at The BEAT" (6 words). But don't invent. The raw title is "The Buildings Archaeologist (Bodmin)". I'll go with: "The Buildings Archaeologist at The BEAT" (6 words). Or just "The Buildings Archaeologist, Bodmin" (4 words). Let's check word count aim: 4-9 words. "The Buildings Archaeologist, Bodmin" is clear. But does it convey what it is? Maybe "An Evening with the Buildings Archaeologist" (6 words) but that's inventing. The raw title is "The Buildings Archaeologist". I'll use: "The Buildings Archaeologist, Bodmin". Actually, looking at the venue, it's in Bodmin, so maybe redundant. But the raw title had (Bodmin), suggesting it's part of the title. Let's strip the parenthetical and use: "The Buildings Archaeologist at The BEAT". That tells you what and where. "The BEAT" is a proper noun. So: "The Buildings Archaeologist at The BEAT". That's 6 words. Good. Wait, is "The Buildings Archaeologist" a person or a title? James Wright is "the buildings archaeologist". It's likely a talk by him. The raw description is "Discovering the Secrets of Britain's Ancient Buildings". So maybe the title could be: "Discovering Britain's Ancient Buildings at The BEAT"? No, shouldn't invent if source is vague, but the raw title is given. The instruction says "Keep the essence: what it is and where". The raw title is essentially the event name. So I'll keep it: "The Buildings Archaeologist at The BEAT". That seems best. SHORT DESCRIPTION RULES: - ONE sentence, 12-25 words. A teaser/hook. - Capture the single most appealing thing. - Standalone — must NOT just be the first sentence of the long description. - No hype words. No emojis. What is appealing? Learning about ancient buildings, architecture, archaeology, dendrochronology. It's a community/history talk. Single most appealing thing: uncovering the hidden stories of old buildings with an expert. Draft: "Explore the hidden history of Britain's ancient buildings through architecture, archaeology and dendrochronology at this Bodmin evening talk." Let's count: Explore(1) the(2) hidden(3) history(4) of(5) Britain's(6) ancient(7) buildings(8) through(9) architecture,(10) archaeology(11) and(12) dendrochronology(13) at(14) this(15) Bodmin(16) evening(17) talk.(18) = 18 words. Good. No hype. "Hidden history" might be slightly hype-y but it's factual based on description "Discovering the Secrets". Maybe "Explore how archaeology and dendrochronology reveal the secrets of Britain's ancient buildings at this Bodmin talk." Count: Explore(1) how(2) archaeology(3) and(4) dendrochronology(5) reveal(6) the(7) secrets(8) of(9) Britain's(10) ancient(11) buildings(12) at(13) this(14) Bodmin(15) talk.(16) = 16 words. Good. But "secrets" is from the raw description. That's fine. Or: "Join buildings archaeologist James Wright for an evening exploring the history hidden within Britain's oldest structures." Count: Join(1) buildings(2) archaeologist(3) James(4) Wright(5) for(6) an(7) evening(8) exploring(9) the(10) history(11) hidden(12) within(13) Britain's(14) oldest(15) structures.(16) = 16 words. But is James Wright confirmed as the speaker? Tags include jameswright. So it's likely. But should I include names not in the main description? Tags have it. The instruction says "Never invent specific facts (prices, line-ups, times, names) that aren't in the input." Tags are part of the input. So James Wright is in the input. But maybe safer not to rely solely on tags? The raw title is "The Buildings Archaeologist". The tag is jameswright. I think using the name is acceptable since it's in the tags. However, the event might be called "The Buildings Archaeologist" because that's his brand. I'll use the name to make it punchy. Wait, let's reconsider: "Join buildings archaeologist James Wright in Bodmin to uncover the stories behind Britain's most intriguing ancient structures." Count: 14 words. "Most intriguing" is hype. Remove: "Join buildings archaeologist James Wright in Bodmin to uncover the stories behind Britain's ancient buildings." Count: Join(1) buildings(2) archaeologist(3) James(4) Wright(5) in(6) Bodmin(7) to(8) uncover(9) the(10) stories(11) behind(12) Britain's(13) ancient(14) buildings.(15) = 15 words. Good. But is "stories" accurate? The description says "Discovering the Secrets". "Uncover the secrets" is okay. "Join buildings archaeologist James Wright in Bodmin for an evening exploring the secrets of ancient British architecture." Count: 15 words. "ancient British architecture" might be broader than "buildings". Fine. Let's try to avoid name if possible to be safe, but it adds appeal. The tag is "jameswright". It's part of raw data. I'll use it. Alternative without name: "Discover how dendrochronology and archaeology reveal the hidden past of Britain's ancient buildings in Bodmin." Count: Discover(1) how(2) dendrochronology(3) and(4) archaeology(5) reveal(6) the(7) hidden(8) past(9) of(10) Britain's(11) ancient(12) buildings(13) in(14) Bodmin.(15) = 15 words. This is strong. Uses specific interesting words from tags. "hidden" is okay. No hype. It's factual. I'll go with: "Discover how dendrochronology and archaeology reveal the hidden past of Britain's ancient buildings in Bodmin." Wait, the instruction says "Speak to Cornwall residents and visitors." and "Locally relevant — reference Cornwall, the town, or the venue when natural." Bodmin is in Cornwall. Mentioning Bodmin is good. LONG DESCRIPTION RULES: - 3-5 sentences, 90-160 words. - Cover: what to expect, who it's for, one notable highlight if obvious. - Locally relevant. - Friendly + informative. No hype. No emojis. - Never invent specific facts. - If minimal, keep honest and brief. Raw data is minimal. But we have tags with details. We know it's at The BEAT, Bodmin. It's a talk. Price is £9.38. Time is Thursday 15 Oct 2026 at 7pm. We can mention it's an evening talk. We can mention the topics: architecture, archaeology, medieval buildings, dendrochronology. We know James Wright (thebuildingsarchaeologist, triskeleheritage) is likely the speaker. But I should be careful not to overstate. Since the tags include these, I can mention "buildings archaeologist James Wright" as that's in the tags. Draft: "Head to The BEAT in Bodmin for an evening talk exploring how we uncover the history of Britain's ancient buildings. Buildings archaeologist James Wright shares insights into medieval architecture, conservation and the science of dendrochronology. Whether you're a history enthusiast or simply curious about old buildings, this friendly event offers a fascinating look at the stories structures can tell. Tickets are £9.38." Let's check word count: Sentence 1: Head(1) to(2) The(3) BEAT(4) in(5) Bodmin(6) for(7) an(8) evening(9) talk(10) exploring(11) how(12) we(13) uncover(14) the(15) history(16) of(17) Britain's(18) ancient(19) buildings.(20) Sentence 2: Buildings(1) archaeologist(2) James(3) Wright(4) shares(5) insights(6) into(7) medieval(8) architecture,(9) conservation(10) and(11) the(12) science(13) of(14) dendrochronology.(15) Sentence 3: Whether(1) you're(2) a(3) history(4) enthusiast(5) or(6) simply(7) curious(8) about(9) old(10) buildings,(11) this(12) friendly(13) event(14) offers(15) a(16) fascinating(17) look(18) at(19) the(20) stories(21) structures(22) can(23) tell.(24) Sentence 4: Tickets(1) are(2) £9.38.(3) Total words: 20+15+24+3 = 62 words. That's too short (need 90-160). I need to expand. Let's add more detail and warmth. "Join us at The BEAT in Bodmin for an evening with buildings archaeologist James Wright, known for his work uncovering the secrets of historic structures across Britain. This talk dives into medieval architecture, conservation and the science of dendrochronology, showing how timber, stone and design reveal the story of a building. It is a welcoming event for anyone interested in history, archaeology or simply understanding more about the ancient buildings around us. Set in the heart of Bodmin, this is a great chance to learn something new and connect with fellow enthusiasts. Tickets are £9.38." Word count: 1. Join(1) us(2) at(3) The(4) BEAT(5) in(6) Bodmin(7) for(8) an(9) evening(10) with(11) buildings(12) archaeologist(13) James(14) Wright,(15) known(16) for(17) his(18) work(19) uncovering(20) the(21) secrets(22) of(23) historic(24) structures(25) across(26) Britain.(27) -> 27 2. This(1) talk(2) dives(3) into(4) medieval(5) architecture,(6) conservation(7) and(8) the(9) science(10) of(11) dendrochronology,(12) showing(13) how(14) timber,(15) stone(16) and(17) design(18) reveal(19) the(20) story(21) of(22) a(23) building.(24) -> 24 3. It(1) is(2) a(3) welcoming(4) event(5) for(6) anyone(7) interested(8) in(9) history,(10) archaeology(11) or(12) simply(13) understanding(14) more(15) about(16) the(17) ancient(18) buildings(19) around(20) us.(21) -> 21 4. Set(1) in(2) the(3) heart(4) of(5) Bodmin,(6) this(7) is(8) a(9) great(10) chance(11) to(12) learn(13) something(14) new(15) and(16) connect(17) with(18) fellow(19) enthusiasts.(20) -> 20 5. Tickets(1) are(2) £9.38.(3) -> 3 Total: 27+24+21+20+3 = 95 words. That's within 90-160. Good. Check for hype: "uncovering the secrets" - from raw description. "great chance" - slightly