Corrections Policy
Technology and security information changes quickly. DLLHelp aims to correct factual mistakes transparently and distinguish a correction from an ordinary update.
Report an error
Email [email protected] with the article URL, the passage in question, what may be wrong, and a source or reproducible detail that supports your report. Please do not send passwords, API keys, personal identifiers, full diagnostic logs, or sensitive screenshots unless we have agreed on a secure method.
How reports are handled
An editor reviews the report and checks the available evidence. We may contact the reporter for clarification. A claim that is still being investigated will not automatically be described as confirmed. We do not promise a fixed response time; urgent security issues should also be reported to the affected software vendor through its appropriate disclosure channel.
Types of changes
Correction: We fix an inaccurate material fact, such as a wrong KB number, unsupported version, misleading security status, or incorrect technical step. For significant corrections we add a clearly visible note explaining what changed and when.
Clarification: We make wording clearer without changing the central factual meaning. Material clarifications may be identified in the article.
Update: We add new developments, such as a vendor fix or revised advisory, without implying that the original publication occurred on the update date. We preserve the original publication date and show the genuine update date.
Retraction: If a report is fundamentally unreliable and cannot be repaired, we may publish a retraction notice and explain why. We do not silently delete accurate historical context solely because a story is no longer current.
What happens after we receive a report
A report is assessed for specificity and potential harm. We first identify the exact article and claim, then determine whether the issue concerns an incorrect fact, an outdated fact, an unsafe instruction, a broken link, an inaccurate image, an omission or a disagreement in interpretation. We compare the report with primary documentation and, where appropriate, seek clarification from the software publisher or reproduce the relevant steps in a controlled environment. A factual issue may be corrected even when its reporter does not agree with every editorial conclusion.
There is no fixed guarantee of reply time. Reports involving a potentially unsafe command, misleading download, exposed private data or an actively relevant security concern should be prioritized over minor presentation errors. If essential information is uncertain, we can add a temporary warning to the affected article while the review continues; we must not pretend an investigation has reached a conclusion before it has.
What a visible correction looks like
For a significant factual change, the affected article should include a concise note in plain language, for example: Correction (date): An earlier version of this article named the wrong Windows build. The build number has been corrected. The note should reflect the actual change and date, not this example. A routine spelling correction need not produce a prominent public notice unless it changes the meaning. If a technical instruction is unsafe, the instructions should be fixed or withdrawn promptly, and the note should make the risk understandable.
A new development is not the same thing as a correction. When Microsoft releases a workaround after our initial report, the article may receive an update with the new status while preserving its original date. We should avoid replacing a report about an older issue with a new unrelated story at the same URL merely to preserve traffic.
Challenges, right of reply and content removal
Individuals or companies named in reporting may contest factual statements through the same contact channel. We review documentary evidence and distinguish checkable errors from differences of opinion. The existence of a complaint does not itself require deleting accurate reporting. Requests involving personal information, copyright, legal notices or significant safety risk are handled individually under applicable law; the site should not promise automatic removal of material that a third party dislikes.
If a story is retracted, the page should normally continue to explain that a retraction occurred and why, subject to legal or safety needs. If a correction is required in Spanish or French as well as English, we check the linked versions and record any differences in timing or wording. We periodically review high-impact guides when new vendor guidance is available, but cannot promise every legacy article is continuously current.
Transparency
Corrections should be made in the affected language version. Where an error occurs across translations, we check and update the related versions as well. Readers may contact us if a correction is incomplete or introduces a new problem.
Contact: [email protected]