Legal and trust
Corrections Policy
Plain-language summary
How a subject or reader can challenge scope, evidence, translation or analysis.
Key points
- Specific, directly relevant sources receive priority.
- Corrections add an auditable event instead of silently rewriting history.
- Documented fact, analysis and allegation remain distinct throughout review.
1. What to submit
Identify the product, claim, locale and reason it may be wrong. Link a directly relevant primary source where possible and explain the passage at issue.
Do not send confidential account credentials, magic codes, unnecessary personal data or material you do not have the right to disclose.
2. How review works
A correction is assessed against the exact product scope, evidence date, rubric version and all affected locales and rights contexts.
Commercial pressure, advertising relationships or a preference for a different rating do not alter the evidence standard.
3. Publication record
A material change creates a dated revision explaining what changed and why. Earlier published states remain available where lawful.
A rejected request may still expose a clarity problem. The interface can be improved without changing a supported factual conclusion.