How we know what we say we know
Trust is part of the story.
Under the Arch makes uncertainty visible. We separate what a record proves from what a source reports, a community remembers, or a legend merely claims.
01 / Working method
Claims before prose.
A chapter can be lyrical. Its foundation cannot be vague. We research and review the smallest checkable assertion before it becomes part of a larger narrative.
- 01
Source
Locate the most direct surviving record.
- 02
Claim
State only what that evidence establishes.
- 03
Review
Record uncertainty, sensitivity, and rights.
- 04
Chapter
Build an argument without hiding the seams.
02 / Evidence key
Certainty has a label.
Every material assertion carries a visible evidence status. A good story does not become less compelling when it admits what remains unknown.
Directly established by a primary record or multiple independent, credible sources.
Attributed to one credible source, but not independently confirmed.
Credible evidence conflicts. We show the competing versions and leave the disagreement visible.
The story demonstrably circulates, but the underlying event is not established as fact.
An internal stop sign. Weak, missing, or high-risk support is resolved before publication.
Oral histories remain named and attributed; they normally appear as Reported unless independent evidence corroborates the account. Flagged material is an internal stop sign and never ships as fact.
03 / Source hierarchy
Get as close to the record as possible.
A lower-ranked source can point us in the right direction. It does not automatically prove the destination.
- 01Original public records, court files, property records, maps, and archival collections
- 02Contemporary newspapers, photographs, directories, letters, and recorded testimony
- 03Peer-reviewed research, reputable books, and professional historic-resource surveys
- 04Museums, historical societies, community archives, and named experts
- 05Well-sourced local reporting and institutional publications
- 06Tourism pages, blogs, marker transcriptions, and social posts — useful as leads, not proof
Community review
Difficult history, told with care.
Chapters involving Japanese American forced removal and incarceration, the 1933 grape strike, xenophobia, labor violence, or family trauma receive additional review from relevant communities or subject-matter experts.
Review is a factual and ethical quality check—not a way to sand down conflict or grant sponsors control over conclusions.
Field-audit gate
Accurate does not always mean walkable.
Before a route is called Walk Ready, every leg must be tested in daylight and at dusk for timing, crossings, lighting, accessibility, public access, cellular service, and a safe early exit.
Explore anywhere
Read and explore remotely. Physical route not yet certified.
Walk Ready
Daylight and dusk audits complete; issues disclosed.
04 / Publication gate
A story ships only when the receipts do.
- Every material claim has a support note and a direct citation.
- Sensitive chapters receive community or subject-matter review.
- Image rights, credits, transcripts, and alt text are recorded.
- Story text, map point, and next-stop direction agree.
- A named reviewer and last-reviewed date are attached.
- Keyboard, contrast, link, and screen-size checks pass.
Corrections are evidence, too
History changes when better sources surface. Our record should show that change.
Return to the atlasMaterial corrections record what changed, why it changed, the evidence behind the change, and the editor and date. A new lead is checked under the same standards as the original claim.
A public correction intake is being prepared. Until it opens, each chapter’s source notes show the evidence behind its claims.