Corrections policy

How to report an error

The fastest way is the contact page. We try to acknowledge correction reports within a few days. For urgent factual errors during active incidents, mark the subject line with [Correction] and we will prioritise it.

What to include

• The page URL where you found the error.
• The specific claim or figure you are contesting. Quote it if you can.
• What you think it should say instead, and why.
• A source we can check. Primary sources (official statements, satellite imagery, on-the-record reporting) are most useful. We will still review reports without a source, but a source materially speeds up the process.

How corrections are reviewed

1. Triage. Reports are checked against the named source. A misreading on our side is corrected immediately; a contested claim is escalated.
2. Cross-reference. For active-conflict claims we look at multiple sources before changing a verification status. A single contrary report does not automatically downgrade a verified claim, but it does trigger review.
3. Edit. The page is updated. The change is logged on the event or claim page so readers can see what changed and when.
4. Communicate.Significant corrections — status changes, casualty revisions of more than 20%, peace proposal status reversals — are surfaced in the "what changed" section of the next daily briefing.

Correction labels

The page where a correction lands will carry one of these labels:

• Updated — figures, dates, or context were corrected with no change in meaning.
• Clarified — wording was changed to remove ambiguity, no change of fact.
• Corrected — a specific factual error has been fixed. The previous wording is summarised on the page.
• Status changed — verification status moved (e.g. Unverified → Disputed, Verified → Outdated) because the evidence base changed.
• Retracted — the original content was wrong enough that we have removed it. The retraction note remains on the page.

What "corrected" means in practice

During active conflict, "corrected" usually means:

• A claim that was first reported with high confidence has been downgraded because independent sources contradict it.
• A casualty figure has been revised after a humanitarian organisation released corrected numbers.
• An incident location, date, or actor has been corrected against satellite imagery, primary documents, or court records.

We treat the existence of the original report as part of the historical record. The verification status changes; the report is not deleted.

Expected response process

• Routine correction (typo, mis-cited date, broken link): usually within a few days.
• Contested factual claim: reviewed against independent sources. Timelines vary; we will respond to acknowledge receipt either way.
• Defamatory or harassment-targeted material: prioritised immediately. If we have published something defamatory we will retract or correct promptly and visibly.

What we will not do

• We will not change a verification status because of one report from a partisan outlet contradicting a body of independent sources.
• We will not remove a correction note to make a page look cleaner.
• We will not delete an entire page in response to political pressure rather than evidence. If a page is removed it will say so and explain why.