This paper proposes a standard by which we can determine whether a putatively suppletive phonology-semantics covariance constitutes counterevidence to the Phonological Individuation Hypothesis (PIH). This standard synthesizes classical arguments of the nature of suppletion as well as contemporary arguments from Borer (2014) and Marantz (1995, 1997) about what characteristics of a covariance would be true to unambiguously be 'true' Root suppletion. It tests the standard against familiar suppletion data from English, Uto-Aztecan, and Algonquian and finds that the standard excludes much of the data we are familiar with (as expected), but the Root suppletion in the Ojibwe verb amw-miiji 'eat', which suppletes for argument animacy, survives the standard, as does the Hopi nominal suppletion, which suppletes for number (e.g., wùuti 'woman.sg'-wùuti.t 'woman.dl'-momoya.m 'woman.pl'). These alternations then unambiguously provide counter-evidence to the PIH, falsifying it.