Corrections Policy
Material errors should be reviewed against evidence and corrected transparently.
What qualifies
Examples include an incorrect factual claim, broken or mismatched source, inaccurate marketplace transcription, misleading limitation, wrong canonical URL or accessibility defect. A difference of opinion is reviewed but is not automatically an error.
How a correction is assessed
The editor identifies the exact passage, checks the cited and current primary sources, records the decision and has a second reviewer inspect material changes where practical. Urgent harmful errors are prioritized.
How changes appear
Minor spelling or formatting fixes may be corrected without a notice. Material factual changes update the reviewed or modified date and should include a concise note in the relevant guide or repository change history.
Submitting a correction
No public correction inbox is currently published, and we will not invent one. Authorized repository collaborators can submit a documented issue or pull request through the project’s existing GitHub workflow. A public channel can be added here only after it is approved and operational.
Last reviewed September 5, 2026 · CollegeTutors.ca editorial team