Editorial
Corrections Policy
Swoopr Investment's educational content is reviewed before publication, but mistakes can still make it through. Here's how to report one, and what happens next.
Direct Answer
Direct answer: To report an error, email editorial@getswoopr.com with the page URL and a description of the issue; the Swoopr Editorial Team reviews it against the cited sources, and if a correction is warranted the page's "Updated" date changes while the original "Published" date stays fixed.
Report an error
Email editorial@getswoopr.com with the page URL and a description of the issue. Include a source or reference where possible, it speeds up review.
What happens after a report
The Swoopr Editorial Team reviews the report against the cited material and the rest of the article. If a correction is warranted, the page is updated and its "Updated" date changes to reflect the correction, the original "Published" date never changes, so the article's history stays visible.
What counts as a correction
Factual errors, outdated figures, broken calculations, and formulas that no longer match current methodology are corrected directly. Requests to change an article's conclusions or add promotional material for a specific broker, exchange, or product are declined, see our Editorial Policy on paid placements.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between a correction and an update?
A correction fixes something that was wrong when it was published: an incorrect figure, a misstated rule, a broken calculation. An update reflects something that has since changed in the world, such as a regulation being amended. Both change the page and its updated date, and only the first is a correction. Separating them keeps the correction record meaningful, since a log that included every routine update would say nothing about accuracy.
Where are confirmed corrections recorded?
In an append-only log on the Evidence and Validation page, generated from the internal correction record rather than maintained by hand. Each entry names the page and describes what was corrected. Publishing the record rather than only fixing the page is what allows a reader to judge how often errors occur and what kind, which is information a silently corrected page destroys.
Is there a stated timeframe for reviewing a reported error?
The policy sets out the process rather than a service commitment, and it would be misleading to imply a turnaround that is not being guaranteed. What a report triggers is a review against the cited material and the rest of the article, followed by a page update where a correction is warranted. Including a source or reference in the report speeds that review, because it shortens the step of establishing what the correct position is.
What happens if a reported error turns out not to be an error?
No correction is made and no log entry is created, because the log records confirmed factual corrections rather than reports received. A report that identifies genuine ambiguity rather than an error can still lead to a page being clarified, which is an editorial revision rather than a correction. Either way the review happens against the source material rather than against how confidently the report was worded.
Are typographical fixes logged as corrections?
No. A spelling or formatting fix does not change what the page asserts, so logging it would add noise to a record whose value depends on containing only substantive entries. The threshold is whether a reader acting on the page would have been misled. A misplaced decimal point in a figure crosses that threshold even though it looks typographical, which is why the test is about meaning rather than about the size of the edit.
What happens when a page was correct but the rule it describes has since changed?
It is updated rather than corrected, and it goes back through the research process for the affected section. Content covering laws, taxes, regulatory rules and protocol specifications carries a recorded review cadence precisely because this happens on its own schedule rather than when someone reports it. A page's updated date reflecting a material revision does not imply that every external rule cited on it has been re-verified since that date.
Does correcting one page trigger checks on related pages?
It should, and the reason is structural: the same fact often appears on more than one page, and fixing one instance while leaving the others produces two pages that disagree. Two pages contradicting each other on the same fact is a specific problem, both for readers and for systems that extract answers from the site, so a correction to a fact stated in several places is treated as a correction to all of them.
How does a correction reach the structured data and the Markdown mirror of a page?
Both are derived from the page rather than maintained separately, so a correction to the visible content propagates. Structured data is checked against the visible markup word for word by an automated check, which fails if the two diverge, and each content page's Markdown mirror is generated from its main content. That derivation is what prevents a corrected page from continuing to serve the old figure to a crawler or an extractor.
Who reviews a correction report?
The Swoopr Editorial Team, which is the same accountability that carries the byline on the page. There is no separate named reviewer step, which the Experts and Contributors page states directly rather than implying otherwise. The review is against the cited material and the surrounding article rather than against the reporter's stated conclusion, so a report that identifies the right problem for the wrong reason still leads to the right fix.