Corrections Policy

GAME6 covers a subject where information changes quickly and where a great deal of what circulates turns out to be wrong. In that environment, errors are not a hypothetical risk — they are a certainty. What distinguishes a trustworthy publication is not that it never gets anything wrong, but that it fixes mistakes openly and leaves a visible record.

How to report an error

Anyone can report an error, and you do not need to explain who you are or why you care. The more precise the report, the faster it can be resolved.

• The article URL — the exact page containing the error.
• The specific statement — quote the sentence rather than describing it generally.
• What is wrong with it — factually incorrect, out of date, missing context, or misattributed.
• A source, if you have one — a link to the primary source is the single most useful thing you can include.

Send reports to corrections@game6.online, or use the contact page and select the correction enquiry type.

How correction requests are reviewed

Every report is read. The review process is deliberately simple: we check the disputed statement against the primary source, establish whether the article is wrong, and decide what kind of change is warranted.

Three outcomes are possible. The article is corrected, because it was wrong. The article is clarified, because it was accurate but capable of being misread. Or no change is made, because the article was correct as published — in which case, if you asked directly, we will tell you why.

Disagreement about interpretation is not the same as a factual error. Where an article draws a conclusion you disagree with, and the underlying facts are accurate, that is editorial judgement rather than a correction — though we are always willing to hear the argument, and opinion pieces are labelled as opinion for exactly this reason.

Minor and major corrections

Not every fix warrants the same treatment, and treating them identically would either clutter articles with trivia or bury significant changes.

• Minor corrections — typographical errors, broken links, formatting problems and other changes that do not affect meaning. These are fixed silently, without a correction note.
• Substantive corrections — anything that changes the meaning of the article: a wrong date, a misstated platform, an incorrect attribution, a claim labelled with more confidence than the evidence supported. These always carry a visible correction note.
• Major corrections — errors that undermine the central claim of an article. These carry a prominent note at the top of the piece and, where the article can no longer stand, a retraction.

How corrections appear

Corrections are displayed on the article itself, at the top of the piece, above the body copy. They are not moved to a separate page, hidden at the foot of the article, or folded silently into the text. A reader who saw the original version should be able to see what changed without hunting for it.

Notes are written in plain language and state what was wrong. For example:

• Correction: An earlier version of this article stated the wrong release window. The date has been corrected and the countdown reference updated.
• Update: This article was updated after a new official announcement changed the platform details described below.
• Clarification: This article previously described a reported detail in a way that could have been read as confirmed. The wording and its status label have been adjusted.

Article timestamps

Substantive corrections update the article’s modification date, which is displayed on the page and included in its structured data. Minor fixes do not, because refreshing a timestamp for a typo would make the date meaningless as a signal of how current the content is.

The original publication date is never altered. An article shows both dates so you can see when it first appeared and when it last genuinely changed.

Retractions

Where an article’s central claim proves to be wrong and cannot be repaired by correcting individual statements, the article is retracted. A retracted article is not deleted: the page remains at its URL, clearly marked as retracted, with an explanation of what was wrong and why. Deleting it would break inbound links and remove the record of the error, which is the opposite of accountability.

Clarifications

A clarification is used when an article was factually accurate but ambiguous — where wording could reasonably have been misread, where necessary context was missing, or where a status label understated the uncertainty involved. Clarifications carry their own note type so they are not confused with corrections of fact.

Headline corrections

Headlines are held to the same standard as body copy. A headline that overstates a finding is an error even when the article beneath it is carefully worded, because many readers see only the headline. When a headline is changed for accuracy, the change is noted on the article alongside any other correction.

Image corrections

Incorrect, misleading or improperly credited images are corrected or removed. Where an image was wrongly attributed, the correction states the accurate attribution. GAME6 uses original artwork and does not publish publisher assets without permission, so most image issues involve credit rather than licensing — but if you believe an image on this site infringes your rights, please contact us directly.

Source corrections

If a source listed on an article is wrong, has moved, or has itself issued a correction, we update the source list and — where the underlying claim is affected — the article alongside it. A source that retracts its own reporting is treated as a trigger to re-examine anything we published on the strength of it.

Expected process and timing

Correction reports are prioritised above other correspondence. We deliberately do not advertise a guaranteed response time: GAME6 is a small publication, and a promise we cannot reliably keep would be worth less than an honest description of how we work.

What we do commit to is the process itself. Reports are read, checked against the primary source, and acted on where the article is wrong. Clear factual errors — a wrong date, a wrong platform — are the fastest to resolve, because verifying them is straightforward.

Related standards

This policy sits alongside the editorial policy, which covers sourcing, confidence labelling and the separation of commercial and editorial decisions. Together they describe how GAME6 decides what to publish and what to do when it gets something wrong.