Our Corrections Policy

This policy applies to all content hosted on Aevum Encyclopedia, including but not limited to encyclopedia articles, infoboxes, knowledge graph entries, multimedia descriptions, category pages, and reference citations.

We are committed to the following principles:

• Accuracy First — Every factual claim must be supported by verifiable, credible sources.
• Timely Resolution — Corrections are processed according to severity-based timelines detailed in Section 5.
• Full Transparency — All accepted corrections are logged publicly with an explanation.
• Open Participation — Anyone — registered or anonymous — can submit a correction.
• No Retaliation — Good-faith correction submissions are always protected, regardless of outcome.

We categorize corrections into the following types, each with an appropriate review pathway:

Submitting a correction is straightforward and accessible to everyone. You have multiple options:

1. Inline Correction Tool — Every article has a "Suggest Correction" button at the top and bottom. Click to highlight text and propose changes directly within the article.
2. Dedicated Form — Use the submission form at the bottom of this page for more detailed correction requests, including bulk corrections or complex issues.
3. Discussion Talk Pages — Every article has an associated talk page where you can discuss proposed changes with other editors and subject experts.
4. Email — Send detailed corrections to corrections@aevum.org for complex or sensitive matters.
5. API — Registered contributors can submit corrections programmatically through our public API (v3.1+).

What to include in your submission:

• The article URL or title you are referencing
• A clear description of the inaccuracy or issue
• The proposed correction or replacement text
• Supporting sources (academic papers, official records, reputable news outlets)
• Your name/username (optional but helps us acknowledge contributions)

Every correction passes through our multi-stage review pipeline to ensure quality and consistency:

We adhere to the following service-level agreements for correction processing, measured from the time of submission to initial acknowledgment or resolution:

These are maximum timeframes. 85% of all corrections are resolved within 48 hours. If your correction exceeds these SLAs, you will receive a status update with an explanation.

We believe full transparency builds trust. Here's how you can track and verify corrections:

• Tracking ID — Every submission receives a unique ID (format: CORR-2025-XXXXX) that you can use to check status.
• Public Change Log — All accepted corrections appear in the article's revision history with timestamps, edit summaries, and contributor attribution.
• Correction Dashboard — Our public dashboard (status.aevum.org) shows real-time correction statistics, including volume, resolution rates, and average processing times.
• Monthly Transparency Reports — Published quarterly, detailing correction volumes, types, acceptance rates, and notable changes.
• Rejected Correction Explanations — If a correction is declined, the submitter receives a detailed explanation with supporting reasoning and, when applicable, editorial references.

Aevum Encyclopedia is a community-powered knowledge platform. Our contributors play a vital role in maintaining accuracy:

• Verified Contributors — Subject-matter experts with confirmed credentials who review corrections in their domain. There are currently 180,000+ verified contributors across 200+ disciplines.
• Community Patrol — An AI-enhanced system that flags potentially problematic content for review, combining automated detection with community reporting.
• Talk Page Discussions — Contested corrections are debated openly on article talk pages before resolution, ensuring multiple perspectives are considered.
• Recognition System — Contributors whose corrections are accepted earn recognition badges and are credited in article histories. Top contributors are featured monthly.
• Peer Review Network — Complex corrections in specialized fields (medicine, law, physics) are routed to peer review networks for multi-expert validation.

Occasionally, corrections may be contested. Our dispute resolution process ensures fair outcomes:

1. Discussion Phase — When a correction is contested, the relevant article's talk page becomes the forum for structured debate. All parties are invited to present sources and reasoning.
2. Mediation — A neutral senior editor facilitates the discussion, ensuring all arguments are weighed against our sourcing and neutrality guidelines.
3. Expert Arbitration — For disputes in specialized domains, we convene a panel of 3 verified experts in the relevant field to make a binding determination.
4. Editorial Board Appeal — Either party may appeal a decision to the Aevum Editorial Board within 14 days. The Board's decision is final.
5. Temporary Tags — During active disputes, articles may carry a "Content Under Review" tag to alert readers that certain information is being evaluated.

We maintain an open and welcoming policy, but we also protect the integrity of our platform. The following constitute bad-faith submissions and may result in account restrictions:

• Vandalism — Deliberate insertion of false, offensive, or disruptive content.
• Mass Fabrication — Submitting multiple corrections with invented or unverifiable sources.
• Coordination to Mislead — Organized campaigns by a group to push a specific narrative through corrections.
• Harassment — Using correction submissions to target or harass other contributors or subjects of articles.
• Confidential Information — Submitting corrections containing non-public or classified information.

Instances of bad-faith behavior are reviewed by our Trust & Safety team. Repeated violations may result in temporary or permanent suspension of editing privileges. We always provide clear notice and an opportunity to appeal.