Every editorial project makes mistakes eventually. What separates a serious editorial project from an ordinary one is how those mistakes are handled. This page sets out the procedure Tesro follows when a factual error, a mis-translation, a broken citation or any other correctable problem is brought to our attention.
Reporting an error
The fastest way to report an error is to write to [email protected] with:
- the URL of the page in question;
- a quotation of the passage you believe is wrong;
- a source we can consult for the correct version.
You are welcome to add context but the three points above are the minimum useful report.
Acknowledgement
We aim to acknowledge every correction request within seven working days of receipt. Acknowledgement is not agreement, we may still need to check the point ourselves, but it confirms that the report has arrived and is under review.
Investigation
Each reported error is checked against the primary sources listed in our Editorial Standards and, where necessary, against the secondary scholarly literature. Where the point is uncontroversial, the correction is made immediately. Where the point is contested in the scholarly literature, we describe the disagreement on the page rather than picking a side.
Types of correction
We distinguish three levels of correction:
- Minor edit. A typographical or grammatical fix that does not change the meaning of the passage. Made silently.
- Factual correction. A change to a substantive claim. Made promptly and noted at the foot of the page for a reasonable period after the correction.
- Substantive rewrite. A change large enough to alter the sense of a page. The revised page is re-dated, and the correction is noted at the foot of the page as long as it remains editorially relevant.
Public correction notes
Factual corrections and substantive rewrites are noted at the foot of the affected page, together with the date of the change. This is our small contribution to the general practice of transparent editorial correction on the open web.
Contested corrections
Where a reader believes we have got something wrong and, after investigation, we do not agree, we say so — politely, in a written reply. If the reader wishes to escalate the disagreement, they may write to the editor as described on our Publishers & Operators page.
Response time
Our target is:
- acknowledgement within seven working days of a report;
- investigation and reply within thirty working days for uncomplicated points;
- longer where a point requires substantive research; in that case we will say so in the acknowledgement.
Statutory obligations
Where a correction is requested under a statutory scheme (for example the Digital Services Act notice-and-action mechanism, or an equivalent domestic regime), please mark the correspondence as such. Statutory requests are dealt with in line with the requirements of the applicable regime, as described on our Regulation & Compliance page.
What we do not do
We do not remove a page from the site simply because a subject dislikes the tone of what we have written. We do not remove a page because a reader disagrees with an editorial judgement we believe we have got right. We do not accept payment in exchange for a correction, or for the removal of a page, see our Publishers & Operators page for the wider policy.
Contact
All correction correspondence goes to [email protected]. Postal correspondence may be sent to the address on our Contact page.
Navigating the rest of the site
The natural next click is the main resource, which gathers everything published on the site under a single introduction.
On the team behind the writing: see About and Publishers & Operators.
On editorial method and its regulatory context: Editorial Standards and Regulation & Compliance.
On legal terms: Privacy Policy, Cookies Policy and Terms of Use.
To write to us, please use Contact.