Corrections & Contributions

A reference library is only useful if it can be trusted, and trust depends on how mistakes get handled. Errors will happen here. When they do, we’d rather hear about them than have them repeated across the internet with our name attached.

• Factual errors: a wrong date, name, attribution, or claim.

• Source problems: a citation that doesn’t support what the entry says, or a link that no longer works.

• Mislabeled material: something presented as historical that’s actually modern, or the reverse.

• Cultural inaccuracies: misrepresentation of a living tradition or community.

• Safety concerns: anything about a plant, oil, or material that could put someone at risk. These are always reviewed first.

Every submission is read. If a correction holds up, the entry is updated and a dated note at the end explains what changed. If you’d like credit, we’ll name you in that note. Small fixes like typos and broken links are made quietly.

This library is the work of one person, so some reviews take time, especially when they mean going back to the sources. Safety concerns always go to the front of the line.

You don’t need to find an error to help. We welcome:

• Topic suggestions: a deity, plant, tradition, or legend you’d like to see covered.

• Sources: books, archives, translations, or scholarship we should know about.

• Practitioner perspectives: if you belong to a living tradition we’ve written about, your view of how it’s represented is valuable.

• Local folklore: regional legends, customs, and stories, especially ones that have never been written down.

We aren’t accepting guest articles yet. When that changes, it’ll be announced here.

Occult history is full of honest disagreement, between scholars, between traditions, and between practitioners. A correction needs evidence. A different interpretation or belief isn’t an error, though it may still be worth a mention in the entry’s discussion of that subject. Send it either way, and include your sources if you have them.