How do I make a fair list of authors to avoid?

Set clear categories before gathering names. A documented statement expressing prejudice is different from a historical claim that experts dispute, and both are different from a mistake that was later corrected. Say exactly which issue you mean rather than using one broad label for everything.

For each entry, keep a record of the original material, when it appeared, the surrounding context, and any response or correction. If you can’t verify a claim from a reliable source, leave it out or mark it as unconfirmed instead of repeating it as fact.

I’d make the resource about specific works and statements, not a verdict on someone’s whole character. Explain what readers should look for, why it matters, and whether the concern applies to one book, a pattern of published work, or an organization’s position. That gives people more to assess than a bare list of names.

Take care with the historical side. A claim being disputed does not automatically make it misinformation, and an author being mistaken on one point does not establish a broader pattern. Describe the specific claim and the nature of the disagreement, and avoid presenting your own interpretation as settled fact.

It may also be worth having someone else review each entry before publishing. A second reader can catch missing context, weak sourcing, or language that goes further than the evidence supports.