> I wrote it as a general article on python dictionaries.

Yet as written it shows no understanding of how Python dictionaries work, and instead presents falsehoods.

"The hash function takes in the key as input and returns a unique integer value"

This is false. They are not unique.

  >>> hash(9) == hash(2**64+1)
  True

"A third probing sequence used in Python dictionaries is double hashing"

This ie another falsehood. Python does not use double hashing. Python objects only have a single hash.

"For small integers, Python dictionaries use linear probing with a small array size (8 or 16). For larger integers or strings, Python dictionaries use quadratic probing with a larger array size (32 or more). For other types of keys, Python dictionaries use double hashing with a larger array size (32 or more)."

This is another falsehood. This specialization does not exist.

If it does exist, show me in the code where it does this.

> more like my understanding of python dictionaries

Your article shows no understanding of Python dictionaries. It is a patchwork of different approaches to making a hash table, almost of which are not applicable to Python. Nor does it mention the places where Python is unusual compared to most hash table, even when clearly pointed out in the code comments.

It is easier for me to believe you are using ChatGPT (or something similar) than to believe you understand the topic.