We use AI to help with the work. We don’t treat its answers as evidence. We check factual claims against sources, question details that don’t hold up and say when we can’t establish what happened.
A good story deserves that care. So does the person reading it.
What makes a story worth sharing?
A familiar building with an unexpected past. A person whose decisions changed the city. A detail you might walk straight past until you know what you’re looking at.
We choose material that gives you more to notice, understand or appreciate about Las Vegas. Sometimes that means uncovering something overlooked. Sometimes it means bringing scattered information together so you can make sense of it without doing all the searching yourself.
Surprise is a good beginning. There needs to be something behind it.
How do we check what happened?
We look for evidence that supports the particular claim: records, contemporary reporting, photographs, interviews and historical research.
We consider where an account came from, how close its author was to the events and whether other evidence supports or challenges it. Several websites repeating the same anecdote may all lead back to one uncertain source.
Different sources answer different questions. A photograph can show what stood in a particular place. It may tell us nothing about who designed it. Someone’s recollection can offer a valuable perspective without settling an exact date.
We aim to keep the telling vivid without adding dialogue, motives or atmospheric details we can’t substantiate.
Can I check the sources myself?
Look for the sources and explanatory notes alongside each story. They should help you follow the evidence, understand a disputed detail or read further.
We’re still adding detailed source trails to some stories. Where those aren’t available yet, we say so. Stories drawn from our books retain their author and original edition details, although those details alone aren’t a substitute for references.
If you want to check something and can’t find its source, ask us. Tell us which page and detail you’re interested in.
What happens when accounts disagree?
Las Vegas has had plenty of practice telling stories about itself. Some are better supported than others.
We distinguish documented events from recollections, interpretation and unresolved claims. When reliable sources disagree, we explain the disagreement. When the evidence doesn’t establish a date, motive or sequence, we don’t quietly fill in the gap.
An unanswered question can be part of a worthwhile story. It doesn’t need an invented answer.
Where does AI fit?
AI helps us research, organise material, draft and edit. We also use it to help create illustrations and audio narration.
Its output still needs checking. Fluent wording doesn’t establish a fact, and a suggested reference is only useful if it exists and supports the claim.
Our standard is to identify generated imagery and synthetic narration clearly. An illustration can help you recognise or imagine a place; it isn’t documentary evidence of how that place looked.
James Hogg and Piers Rollinson remain responsible for Vegas Retold’s editorial standards and what we publish. Using AI doesn’t pass that responsibility elsewhere.
What if we’ve got something wrong?
We want to know. A source we haven’t seen, a mistaken identification or a detail we’ve overlooked can change an account.
Suggest a correction or share a source. Include the page, the detail you’re questioning and any supporting material you have.
We assess corrections against the evidence. When we get something wrong, our commitment is to correct it and make meaningful changes clear to readers.
The point of checking is to get closer to what happened—and to remain willing to learn.