Trustworthiness (T) Mandate

Correction Policy (COID)

Error Resolution Mandate (Policy 4.1)

The official procedure to ensure maximum factual and contextual accuracy of all editorial content published on the Storyweaver's Sanctum.

1. Commitment to Accuracy and Transparency

Factual accuracy is the foundation of our Authority (A). Adhering to the Arc of Integrity Protocol, we recognize that the complexity of narrative analysis and contextual research may occasionally lead to information deficiencies.

The **COID (Correction Of Information Deficiencies)** is our formal and auditable process to promptly correct any factual, contextual, or attribution error, maintaining the integrity of our editorial archive and the trust of our audience.

2. Classification of Information Deficiencies

The Methodological Integrity Council classifies deficiencies into three levels to determine the correction protocol:

A. Minor Errors

Typographical errors, slight grammatical mistakes, broken links, or incorrect dates without impact on the central argument. (E.g., "Theoy" instead of "Theory").

B. Relevant Factual Errors

Inaccuracies in dates, names, theoretical concepts, or bibliographic references essential to the argument. (E.g., Incorrect attribution of a quote to an author).

C. Severe Contextual Deficiencies

Data or interpretations that, if incorrect, compromise the validity of the analysis. Requires a prominent correction notice or partial/total retraction.

3. Reporting and Internal Vetting Protocol (The Integrity Check)

3.1. How to Report a Deficiency

  1. Send an email to corrections@storyweaversanctum.com (or use `correcoes@` if you prefer).
  2. Include the full URL of the article.
  3. Specify the incorrect passage and provide the correct source of information (preferably academic or primary).
  4. Your submission is reviewed within 72 hours.

3.2. Internal Action Procedure

The correction process is overseen by Felipe Pedranza, Ethics and IP Compliance Officer:

  • **Validation (Rosa Mara):** Contextual and factual check of the deficiency.
  • **Resolution (Renato/Carolina):** Determination of the impact on the narrative/theoretical argument.
  • **Implementation (Felipe Pedranza):** The article is corrected and the errata notice is applied.

4. Notification and Archival Policy

Transparency requires that the correction history be evident to the reader:

A. Minor Errors (Level A)

Corrected internally without an errata notice in the article body, to preserve reading flow. The correction log is maintained in our internal editorial archive.

B. Relevant Errors and Severe Deficiencies (Level B and C)

The original text is corrected, and a **Correction Note** is mandatorily inserted:

  • Located at the **top or footer** of the article.
  • Includes the **Correction Date** and a **clear Description** of what was altered.
  • Is permanent and cannot be removed.

The COID ensures that our narrative architecture is not only solid but also honest.