Corrections Policy
Accuracy matters, and mistakes should be corrected.
Niles Connect may correct, clarify, or update published material when reliable information shows that something is materially inaccurate, incomplete, outdated, or likely to be misunderstood.
Our approach
Corrections are part of maintaining reliable information.
Niles Connect contains information that may change over time and material collected from many different sources. When a meaningful error is identified, the goal is to correct the information rather than preserve an error simply because it was previously published.
Accuracy
Material factual errors should be corrected when reliable information establishes that the published information is wrong.
Context
Information that is technically accurate may still require clarification when missing context materially changes how a reasonable reader would understand it.
Updates
Developing information may be updated as new records, evidence, decisions, or other reliable information becomes available.
What may be corrected
Not every change is the same.
The appropriate response depends on the nature and significance of the issue.
Factual errors
Incorrect names, dates, figures, locations, descriptions, quotations, or other material facts may be corrected when the error can be established.
Material omissions
Important missing information may be added when its absence creates a materially incomplete or misleading understanding.
Developing information
Articles, investigations, datasets, and other material may be updated as additional reliable information becomes available.
Clarifications
Language may be clarified when the original wording could reasonably create an unintended or materially inaccurate impression.
Technical errors
Broken links, formatting problems, incorrect labels, duplicate information, or other technical mistakes may be corrected without changing the underlying substance.
Dataset corrections
Structured data may be updated when source records change, duplicate entries are identified, or reliable information establishes that an entry is inaccurate.
Review process
How a correction request is evaluated
A correction request should identify the specific information at issue and provide enough detail to evaluate the concern.
1. Identify the material
Provide the article, page, record, listing, dataset entry, or other content containing the disputed information.
2. Identify the claimed error
Explain specifically what information you believe is inaccurate, incomplete, outdated, or misleading.
3. Provide support
Include records, source material, links, documents, or other information supporting the requested correction when available.
4. Review the evidence
Available supporting information may be compared with the material originally relied upon.
5. Determine the appropriate action
The result may be a correction, clarification, update, no change, or another appropriate response based on the available information.
6. Preserve uncertainty when necessary
If available evidence does not establish which account is correct, the appropriate response may be to explain the uncertainty rather than choose one unsupported conclusion.
Possible outcomes
How published material may change
Correction
Incorrect factual information is changed to reflect what the available evidence supports.
Clarification
Additional explanation is added when the original information was not necessarily false but could reasonably be misunderstood.
Update
New information is added when circumstances or the available evidence have materially changed since publication.
Technical correction
Typographical, formatting, navigation, or similar errors may be fixed without a substantive change to the information.
No change
A requested change may not be made when the available evidence does not establish that the published material is inaccurate or requires clarification.
Further review
Some questions may remain unresolved while additional records or information are sought.
Corrections vs. disagreement
Disagreement does not necessarily establish an error.
A correction is appropriate when the underlying information is materially inaccurate or misleading. A person disagreeing with a conclusion, interpretation, criticism, or documented information does not by itself establish that a correction is required.
Factual error
A verifiable statement is materially inconsistent with reliable evidence.
Disputed interpretation
Two people may reasonably interpret the same underlying information differently.
Additional perspective
New context or another person’s response may be worth considering even when the original information does not require correction.
Public records & source material
Correcting our description of a record is different from altering the record.
Public records and other source documents should generally remain faithful to the source material from which they were obtained.
Source documents
Niles Connect should not rewrite an authentic source document simply because the document itself contains an allegation, disputed statement, error, or later-outdated information.
Descriptions & summaries
Niles Connect’s own description, summary, metadata, or interpretation of a record may be corrected when inaccurate.
Additional context
Later records, corrections, responses, or other material may be linked or added when they materially affect how an earlier record should be understood.
Community submissions
User-submitted content requires a different approach.
Community submissions are not automatically Niles Connect editorial statements. Concerns involving user content may involve moderation as well as correction.
Community statements
A submission may contain the contributor’s own description, experience, opinion, or assertion.
Moderation concerns
Harassment, privacy issues, threats, spam, or other inappropriate material should be evaluated under the Moderation Policy.
Factual concerns
Significant factual problems may warrant additional review, clarification, moderation, or other action depending on the circumstances.
Removal requests
A correction request is not automatically a removal request.
Accurate information is not necessarily removed simply because someone would prefer that it no longer appear on the site. Privacy, safety, legal, source-integrity, and public-interest considerations may require separate evaluation.
Accuracy
If information is wrong, correcting it may be the appropriate response.
Privacy
A request involving personal or sensitive information may require review under the site’s privacy standards.
Source integrity
Authentic public records may need to remain intact even when later material provides additional context or disputes statements contained in the original record.
Report a correction
Tell us exactly what needs review.
Correction requests are handled by email. Providing specific information makes the issue much easier to evaluate.
Include the page
Send the title or page address where the information appears.
Identify the statement
Quote or clearly describe the specific information you believe needs to be corrected.
Provide supporting information
Include reliable records, sources, documents, or other evidence supporting the requested change when available.
Email corrections
soxside@gmail.com
Use a clear subject such as “Correction Request” and include enough information to identify and evaluate the issue.
No fixed review deadline is promised.
The amount of time needed to evaluate a correction may depend on the issue, available records, supporting information, and whether additional research is necessary.
Related policies
Accuracy involves more than corrections.
Verification explains how factual claims may be evaluated, while Transparency explains the broader approach to sources and information on Niles Connect.