Thanks for sharing it! I'm one of the people behind the project. Your doubt is exactly the right question: rigor is the whole point of the archive. Every entry carries a verification level based on the sources behind it, so anyone can see what's confirmed and what isn't. That's also why we're going slowly.
Arkhé is meant to be a global catalogue, open to the whole community and built by all of us. If you grow Trichocereus with known provenance, whether it's one plant or a whole collection, you can add it with photos and whatever you know about its origin:
Document a Trichocereus clone in the archive: what you call it, where it comes from and what you can show. Reviewed before anything is published.
www.arkhecactus.com
Each contribution is reviewed and attributed to you either by name or anonymously, according to your choice, and anything you cannot fully document still counts, it just appears with a lower verification level.
The quality of an archive is not measured by having no mistakes, but by how it corrects them when they appear. If you spot a clone you think is wrong, tell us here or through the website form and we'll review it.