Make every material correction visible, dated, and retriggered

Classify the change before editing

Use four operational classes: cosmetic, clarification, material correction, and withdrawal or retirement. Cosmetic edits do not change meaning. A clarification narrows language without reversing the supported claim. A material correction changes a fact, number, attribution, comparison, or conclusion that can affect interpretation. Withdrawal or retirement tells readers that the item should no longer be relied on in its former state. The label should reflect reader impact, not editorial embarrassment.

The Associated Press's public principles call for errors to be acknowledged visibly to consumers and distributed clients. Crossref's Crossmark documentation similarly distinguishes status updates that affect crediting or interpretation from formatting changes. A small publisher does not need scholarly infrastructure to adopt the useful pattern: preserve the stable page, describe the meaningful change, and connect any separate notice to the item it updates.

Source notes: AP Statement of News Values and Principles · Crossmark: registering updates

Give each claim a freshness trigger

For a moving claim, record source URL, source title, source publication date if the source states one, retrieval date, supported passage or field, claim owner, and trigger. Triggers can be a standards revision, vendor terms change, campaign close, new annual filing, product deprecation, reader challenge, or a scheduled review. Unknown source dates remain null; do not infer a publication date from a URL, copyright footer, or search snippet.

A retrieval date shows when the editor checked the source. It is not the event date, source publication date, page publication date, or proof that the claim remains current. A freshness review should open the primary document again, compare the claim and method, and record no-change or revision. Link checks alone do not detect changed text at a stable URL.

Values illustrate the record shape, not a real provider claim.

Source notes: Influence your byline dates in Google Search

Write the revision note for the reader

A material note should say when the page changed, what the earlier text said in substance, what is correct now, and why the change matters. Link the supporting source. Do not silently replace a number and refresh the page date. Preserve the first publication date once real publication occurs, and use a separate modification date for substantial updates. Google documents publication and modification as different fields and advises visible and structured dates to remain consistent.

Illustrative note: 'Corrected 19 September 2026: the table previously used requests as the denominator for fill rate. It now uses eligible requests, changing the example from 80% to 84%. The operating conclusion is unchanged.' If the conclusion changes, say so. Do not backdate the note, invent an earlier publication date, or turn a cosmetic punctuation edit into a freshness signal.

Source notes: Influence your byline dates in Google Search · AP Statement of News Values and Principles

Retrigger every downstream use

Map where the corrected claim traveled: article cards, comparison tables, calculators, downloadable files, newsletters, feeds, syndicated copies, sponsor reports, and social posts. The correction ticket should generate tasks for each affected rendition. A revised web page does not repair a downloaded PDF or a newsletter already sent. For prior email, publish a correction in the next appropriate issue or send a dedicated notice when the consequence justifies it.

Use a stable claim or article identifier in downstream records. That lets a source trigger reopen every dependent item instead of relying on memory. If a calculator assumption changes, update the formula, example, help text, saved version label, and tests together. If a source disappears, retain the archived evidence only where permitted and mark the public claim for replacement or qualification rather than pretending the source still resolves.

Source notes: Crossmark: registering updates

Measure correction quality without gaming speed

Track open material reports, time to acknowledge, time to decide, time to correct, downstream items still outstanding, and repeat defects by cause. Fast acknowledgment matters, but a rushed unverified correction can create a second error. Set internal targets appropriate to staffing and consequence; do not publish a response promise the team cannot maintain.

Close a correction only after the primary page, metadata, structured dates, and dependent renditions agree. Record the reviewer and source check. Reader-submitted challenges that do not lead to a change still deserve a disposition and retained evidence under the publication's privacy rules. The system's value is the visible record: readers can tell which version they have and why a consequential statement changed.

• Separate cosmetic edits from material status changes.
• Keep publication, modification, source, event, and retrieval dates distinct.
• Notify every downstream owner when a claim changes.
• Retest tools and downloads that embed the corrected claim.

Source notes: AP Statement of News Values and Principles · Crossmark: registering updates