Corrections

How to notify us

Use the contact form, select corrections and identify the page, disputed passage and a verifiable source. Do not include unnecessary personal data in the message.

How we correct

We review the report against the sources. Confirmed errors are corrected in the content; when a change materially alters its meaning, it should be explained visibly.

Priority and change record

Safety issues, false attributions and errors that alter the central conclusion receive priority. A minor style change is handled differently from a factual correction; when new evidence supersedes an earlier account, we update the context and distinguish an evolving story from an error in the original reporting.

Classification and review workflow

Reports are classified as factual errors, missing context, translation problems, image or license issues, broken data relationships, or technical presentation faults. We reproduce the problem, compare the disputed passage with the recorded evidence and assess its effect on the headline, conclusion and linked records. The review should identify an owner and preserve enough information to explain the decision later.

A confirmed correction is applied wherever the error propagated: language versions, summaries, metadata, related object profiles, captions and reused media records. A rejected report is not ignored; the reason and evidence should remain available internally so that the same issue can be reconsidered if better information appears.

Visible notices and material changes

Spelling, punctuation or layout can be fixed without a public notice when meaning is unchanged. A correction that changes a name, figure, attribution, chronology, scientific interpretation or central conclusion should include a clear note describing what changed and why. We do not silently rewrite a materially inaccurate story or erase the fact that readers previously saw different information.

An update is different from a correction: new mission results can make an earlier, accurate account incomplete without making it erroneous. In that case we preserve the original context, add the newer evidence and label the update appropriately. Serious errors may justify temporary unpublication while the record is repaired.

How reports are handled and accountability is preserved

A useful report includes the exact URL, disputed statement, reason it may be wrong and the strongest available evidence. Contact details are used to clarify the report, not to determine whether criticism is welcome. The identity or status of the person reporting an error does not outweigh the evidence, and respectful reports are assessed even when they challenge an editorial decision. We do not promise a fixed response time because complexity and urgency vary.

The internal record links the report, assessment, action, affected translations and completion checks. Where a correction affects syndicated summaries, object profiles or media metadata, those dependencies are reviewed before the case is closed. Repeated corrections in the same area trigger a process review, which may change source requirements, automated validation or the way uncertainty is presented.