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 append an auditable event instead of rewriting history silently.
- 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 when 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. Prior 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.