Secret Magic aims to describe historical sources and religious traditions accurately, distinguish evidence from interpretation, and correct substantive errors transparently. This policy explains what we correct and how readers can request a review.
What counts as a substantive correction?
We correct errors that can materially change a reader’s understanding, including:
- Incorrect names, dates, titles, translations, or attributions.
- A quotation that does not match the cited edition.
- A modern practice presented incorrectly as ancient or medieval.
- A claim described as documented fact when the source supports only interpretation or belief.
- A broken citation that prevents verification of an important claim.
- An image caption that misidentifies an object, manuscript, person, or date.
Minor edits
Spelling, grammar, formatting, link maintenance, and wording changes that do not alter meaning may be corrected without a formal note. Substantive revisions may be acknowledged within the article when the nature of the change would matter to returning readers.
How to request a correction
Email [email protected] with:
- The URL of the page.
- The exact sentence or claim you believe is incorrect.
- A reliable source supporting the proposed correction, preferably a primary source, critical edition, peer-reviewed study, or institutional catalogue.
- Your suggested wording, if useful.
How requests are reviewed
The editorial team checks the cited material, the source type, and the context of the disputed passage. A correction may be accepted, declined with the original wording retained, or resolved by rewriting the passage to represent uncertainty or scholarly disagreement more accurately.
Disagreement alone does not establish an error. Articles about esoteric traditions often involve competing translations, religious interpretations, or contested chronologies. In those cases, the appropriate correction may be to describe the disagreement rather than choose one position as certain.
Updates and new evidence
An article may be revised when a better edition, newly digitized manuscript, or stronger academic source becomes available. Updating an interpretation in light of new evidence is part of responsible research, not an attempt to hide the earlier state of the page.
Independence
Correction decisions are based on evidence. Advertisers, affiliates, subjects of coverage, and outside groups do not receive the right to approve editorial conclusions.
For our evidence standards, read Sources & Research Methodology.