Enjoy the shiver. Keep the questions.

Our purpose

Why we are here

Paranormal stories matter even when their causes remain unresolved. They reveal what frightened people, what communities believe and how old ideas adapt to new places and technologies.

We want readers to feel the story first, then see how it was built. That means preserving the atmosphere while being candid about sources, uncertainty and gaps in the record.

The method

Encounter, lore, evidence

The encounter

We reconstruct the reported experience in sequence and attribute extraordinary events to the people or sources claiming them.

The lore

We look for the older patterns beneath the case—local legends, cultural expectations and recurring paranormal ideas.

The evidence

We distinguish testimony, documents, photographs, later recollection and editorial interpretation. Unknown does not mean supernatural; unexplained does not mean impossible.

Editorial standards

How we work

• Claims are attributed and are not presented as established fact.
• Sources are named and linked where readers can reasonably access them.
• Pseudonyms and privacy choices used by principal witnesses are respected.
• Original case photographs are not reproduced without a clear licence or permission.
• Artwork, timelines and diagrams are labelled as editorial visualisations rather than evidence.
• Witnesses are treated as people, not props; uncertainty is not used to mock sincere experience.
• Competing explanations and meaningful weaknesses in the record are included.
• Articles are updated when reliable new information materially changes the account.

Corrections

Help us get it right

If you spot a factual error, send the article title, the passage concerned and a reliable source supporting the correction. Substantial factual changes will be acknowledged in the article; small spelling, formatting and clarity edits may be corrected without a note.

Questions of interpretation are welcome too, but disagreement alone does not establish an error.