Sources & Methodology

How we source what we publish — and how we handle the line between verifiable fact and astrological interpretation.

Factual claims

For anything checkable — astronomy, history, dates, the documented rules of a system — we rely on authoritative, primary sources and cite them on the page. Examples of the kinds of sources we use:

• Astronomy: established scientific bodies and references (e.g. NASA, the International Astronomical Union) for facts like precession, constellation boundaries, and the ecliptic.
• History: reputable reference works for the origins of the zodiac, tarot, numerology, and the Eastern systems.

We quote a source directly only when we can verify its exact wording against the original; otherwise we paraphrase and attribute. We do not publish invented or unverified quotes.

Astrological interpretation

Much of astrology is interpretive — what a sign's traits "mean," how two signs relate, what a card or number signifies. We present these as the traditions hold them, drawing on standard astrological references, and we label them as interpretation rather than fact. A trait profile is a portrait drawn from a long tradition, not a scientific finding.

When traditions disagree

Systems often conflict — Western (tropical) vs. Vedic (sidereal) astrology; Indian vs. Chinese palmistry. Rather than flatten these into one "answer," we name which tradition holds which view and explain why they differ. Where useful, we tell you which approach is most common today.

What astrology is — and isn't — to us

We treat astrology as a meaningful cultural and symbolic tradition, not as a physical science, and we say so. Where a popular claim rests on a misunderstanding of real astronomy, we explain the actual science clearly. Our goal is content you can trust to be honest about what it is.

Corrections

Sourcing should be accurate and current. If a citation is wrong or out of date, let us know and we'll fix it.