Corrections and update policy

How to report a concern

Use the existing HouseManagers contact workflow. Include the page URL, the statement you believe needs correction and a concise explanation. A link to an authoritative source is useful. Avoid sending unnecessary personal information, access codes or complete private documents to explain a public factual issue.

A provider-information request and an editorial correction may need different evidence. A request to change a business identity or credential is not automatically a verified change. A request to remove criticism is not itself proof that the underlying public fact is false. The existing Editorial Policy explains the broader standards.

What a review should establish

Identify the claim, check the relevant source and confirm the source’s scope and date. A county rule does not automatically describe a city requirement. A manufacturer’s instruction for one model does not establish a rule for every system. A changed price or service area should be attributed and dated rather than presented as timeless.

When evidence conflicts, retain the uncertainty and seek an appropriately qualified review. Do not resolve a technical disagreement solely through a software similarity score or a successful schema check. If a material claim cannot be supported, correct, qualify or remove it through the editorial workflow.

Record substantive changes

The resource record includes a factual change log. For a substantive edit, explain what changed and why. Preserve the supporting source and the review of that revision. An approval belongs to the exact body, title, route and evidence record; changing those elements requires a new approval.

Minor formatting or spelling changes do not justify pretending the underlying research is new. A displayed substantive update date should correspond to an actual factual or meaningful content change. Do not refresh dates to make a page appear recent without doing the work.

Keep review dates useful

A review reminder means someone should check the material. It does not prove that an update occurred. Revisit sources when an authority changes its guidance, an official link moves, a provider’s coverage changes or a cost assumption no longer reflects its stated evidence. Leave unknown performance fields unknown while reporting access is unavailable.

Revisions and rollback

Native WordPress revisions retain body history, and the component stores editorial evidence snapshots with revisions. A restored resource must pass the same review checks before it can be published again. Disabling the resource-center public route is a reversible way to take the component out of public use without deleting its research records.

Keep a verified release package, content export and the host’s normal backups. A plugin ZIP is not a complete database or media backup. Reconcile changes made after an earlier snapshot before restoring a live site.