Editorial Principles
The Consequences of America is committed to accuracy, context, transparency, independence, and respect for the historical record. Entries should distinguish documented fact from interpretation and should avoid presenting uncertainty as certainty.
Accuracy and Context
Historical claims should be supported by reliable published sources. Quotations, dates, names, statistics, and descriptions of events should be checked against the strongest available evidence. Material context should not be omitted merely because it complicates the narrative or challenges a preferred conclusion.
Fair Representation
Entries should represent significant competing interpretations when credible evidence supports them. The project does not require false balance between well-supported history and unsupported assertions. People and communities should be described with dignity while still allowing candid examination of harmful actions and consequences.
Interpretation and Classification
The Good, Bad, and Ugly classifications are editorial interpretations of documented consequences. They should be explained through evidence and should remain open to reconsideration when new information materially changes the historical assessment.
Artwork Standards
Artwork may use symbolic or composite imagery to communicate historical meaning. It must not be presented as documentary photography. When equipment, uniforms, locations, flags, insignia, or historical figures are depicted as specific real-world subjects, reasonable efforts should be made to improve technical and historical authenticity.
Corrections
Credible correction requests are reviewed against the available evidence. Minor typographical or formatting errors may be corrected without a formal notice. Material changes involving facts, conclusions, attribution, classification, or significant visual accuracy should be documented with a correction or revision note.
How to Request a Correction
A correction request should identify the specific entry, the statement or image element in question, the proposed correction, and the supporting source. Civil, evidence-based submissions will receive priority. Disagreement with an interpretation alone does not establish a factual error, but well-supported alternative interpretations may be considered in future revisions.