Corrections Policy

Moonlight Peaks Tools corrects published facts when better evidence shows that a statement, status, source label, or calculation assumption is wrong. A correction should change the affected content and its evidence record; changing only an “updated” date is not a correction.

Current submission status

There is no public operator email address, form, or issue tracker in the current build. This page describes the correction standard and the information to preserve, but it is not itself a working submission form. The Contact page lists the limited public routes that actually exist.

The site owner may discover and correct issues during a scheduled recheck of official announcements, storefronts, or fixed source revisions. Because there is no direct editorial intake channel, the project cannot promise that a visitor’s unpublished observation will be seen or answered.

Information needed for a useful correction

For any future public correction channel, prepare a compact evidence packet containing:

1. The exact moonlightpeaks.net page URL and the heading, card, table row, or calculator field involved.
2. The current wording or value and the specific replacement you believe is accurate.
3. A public source URL. Prefer an official announcement, storefront, patch note, or fixed community revision over a search-results page.
4. The relevant platform, region, game version or patch, and the date the information was observed.
5. A short explanation of whether the problem is a factual error, outdated snapshot, transcription error, source conflict, broken link, misleading label, or calculator defect.

Do not send passwords, account identifiers, receipts, private correspondence, save files, crash dumps, or unrelated personal information. This site has no upload endpoint and does not need those materials to correct an editorial statement.

How evidence is evaluated

First-party game pages, publisher notices, official platform listings, and official patch notes normally receive the strongest weight for the claim they actually make. A dated first-party statement can still become stale, and one platform’s listing does not automatically prove behavior on another platform.

A community wiki can support a fact when the exact revision is recorded and the content is within that source’s scope. Editorial guides and player observations are useful for discovering gaps or corroborating behavior, but they are not relabelled as official. Multiple sites repeating the same unsourced number do not create independent confirmation.

If two credible sources conflict, the project records the competing values and their platform, date, or version boundaries. It does not resolve a conflict by majority vote or silently select the value that produces the cleanest calculator output. If the available evidence cannot settle the issue, the visible result should remain unknown, conflicting, or not reconfirmed.

Correction outcomes

A confirmed correction may result in one or more of the following changes:

• replacing an incorrect statement or formula input;
• narrowing a claim to the platform, region, version, or date that the source supports;
• changing a confidence or evidence-status label;
• adding a conflict note rather than choosing one disputed value;
• removing an unsupported row, image, or recommendation;
• updating the source URL, revision identifier, verification date, tests, and dependent calculator examples.

An observation that cannot yet be reproduced should not overwrite a source-backed default. It may instead identify a future research question. Missing evidence does not mean the visitor is wrong; it means the public conclusion is not ready.

Game support is separate

This corrections policy covers mistakes on Moonlight Peaks Tools. It cannot repair a game installation, investigate a crash, restore a save, or change an official issue status. Use the official reporting route linked from the known-issues page for game bugs and support requests.

Copyright, trademark, privacy, and asset-removal concerns follow the separate Takedown Requests process rather than the ordinary editorial evidence standard.