Internet Chicks Worth is committed to correcting material factual errors when reliable evidence shows that published information is inaccurate or misleading.
Our articles may discuss net worth estimates, earnings, contracts, businesses, ownership interests, career events, and other information that can change over time. We distinguish between an error that existed when an article was published and new information that becomes available later.
This policy explains how readers can report a possible error, how we evaluate correction requests, and how significant changes are handled.
What Can Be Corrected?
We welcome correction requests involving factual information such as:
- names and professional identities;
- dates and ages;
- current or former professional roles;
- company names and business relationships;
- founder or ownership claims;
- contracts, salaries, bonuses, and reported earnings;
- company valuations and transactions;
- net worth estimates and their attribution;
- currencies and financial time periods;
- quotations;
- official social-media profiles;
- legal-status descriptions;
- and incorrectly attributed sources.
We also review reports of broken or incorrect source links when they affect a reader’s ability to verify an important claim.
How to Submit a Correction
Please submit correction requests through our Contact page.
To help us evaluate a request efficiently, include:
- the URL of the Internet Chicks Worth page;
- the exact statement you believe is inaccurate;
- what you believe the correct information should be;
- a reliable source supporting the proposed correction;
- any additional context needed to understand the issue.
Whenever possible, provide a direct link to the supporting source rather than only the name of a website or publication.
If you are the subject of an article, an authorized representative, or a company mentioned in the article, you may identify that relationship in your message. We will still evaluate the requested change using the same evidence standards applied to other correction requests.
What Makes a Useful Supporting Source?
The strongest correction requests are supported by evidence that directly addresses the disputed claim.
Depending on the issue, useful sources may include:
- official records or filings;
- government or court documents;
- official company information;
- direct public statements;
- original interviews;
- reputable independent reporting;
- or other authoritative documentation.
A social-media comment, anonymous post, search-result snippet, or another unsourced net worth article may not be sufficient to establish that a published statement is incorrect.
Our broader source standards are explained in our Editorial Policy and Fact-Checking Policy.
How We Review Correction Requests
A correction request does not automatically result in a change.
When a request is received, the responsible editor may:
- review the statement being challenged;
- revisit the sources originally used;
- examine the evidence supplied with the request;
- look for stronger primary or independent sources;
- check whether the information has changed since publication;
- and determine whether the existing wording remains accurate and appropriately qualified.
The amount of review required depends on the significance and complexity of the claim.
Financial claims, ownership information, legal matters, and disputes between credible sources may require additional verification before a decision is made.
Material Errors
A material error is a factual problem that could meaningfully change a reader’s understanding of the subject or article.
Examples may include:
- identifying the wrong person;
- publishing an incorrect financial amount;
- describing company revenue as personal income;
- incorrectly stating that someone owns a company;
- presenting an estimate as a verified fact;
- using the wrong currency;
- materially misstating a contract;
- incorrectly describing the status of a legal matter;
- or attributing a statement to the wrong source.
When a material error is confirmed, we aim to correct the affected content rather than leave information online that we know to be inaccurate.
Depending on the significance of the change, we may also add a correction or editor’s note explaining what was changed.
Minor Corrections
Not every edit requires a public correction note.
Minor changes may include:
- spelling corrections;
- grammar improvements;
- punctuation;
- formatting;
- fixing a broken link without changing the underlying evidence;
- correcting an obvious typographical error;
- or improving wording without changing the factual meaning.
These changes may be made without a formal correction notice.
Updates Are Different From Corrections
New information does not necessarily mean that the original article was wrong.
For example, after publication a creator may:
- sign a new contract;
- launch a company;
- sell a business;
- receive new funding;
- disclose earnings;
- change professional roles;
- or become the subject of a new public filing.
When previously accurate information becomes outdated because of a later event, we normally treat the change as an update, not a correction.
A correction addresses information that was materially inaccurate or misleading based on the evidence applicable to the statement.
An update incorporates material information that became available later.
Net Worth Estimate Corrections
Net worth figures require particular care because most are estimates rather than audited financial disclosures.
A disagreement with an estimate does not by itself establish that the article contains a factual error.
When reviewing a disputed net worth figure, we consider:
- whether the article clearly identifies the figure as an estimate;
- the source of the estimate;
- the quality and date of that source;
- whether newer evidence materially affects it;
- whether the figure has been confused with revenue, income, valuation, or contract value;
- and whether the article accurately explains the uncertainty.
If no reliable exact figure is publicly available, we may retain appropriately qualified language rather than replace one unsupported estimate with another.
Our approach is explained in How We Estimate Net Worth.
Conflicting Sources
Reliable sources sometimes disagree.
In these situations, we do not automatically accept the newest, highest, or lowest figure.
We consider:
- proximity to the original information;
- source authority;
- methodology;
- publication date;
- whether the sources describe the same financial measure;
- and whether independent corroboration exists.
Where a conflict cannot reasonably be resolved, the article may be revised to acknowledge the disagreement rather than present one version as certain.
Requests From Article Subjects or Representatives
We welcome factual corrections from the people we cover, their authorized representatives, companies, and public-relations teams.
However, editorial coverage is not controlled by the subject of an article.
We do not:
- change a supported fact solely because it is unfavorable;
- replace independent evidence with promotional wording;
- increase or decrease a net worth estimate in exchange for payment;
- remove relevant public information solely on request;
- or guarantee changes before reviewing the evidence.
Reliable first-party information can be valuable, but it is evaluated in context and may be independently checked before publication.
Privacy and Safety Requests
A request involving private or sensitive personal information may be considered separately from a conventional factual correction.
This can include concerns involving:
- exact private home addresses;
- non-public contact information;
- sensitive information about children;
- private financial documents;
- intimate material;
- or information that creates a credible personal-safety concern.
We may remove or limit information when the privacy or safety concern outweighs its editorial value, even when the information is technically accurate.
Please identify the privacy or safety concern clearly when contacting us.
Legal Requests
If a correction request concerns an allegation, lawsuit, investigation, settlement, judgment, or other legal matter, provide the strongest available documentation.
Useful evidence may include:
- court records;
- official agency information;
- settlement documentation where public;
- or reliable reporting describing the current status of the matter.
We distinguish allegations from established facts and aim to describe legal status precisely.
A threat of legal action does not automatically determine our editorial decision. The underlying facts and evidence must still be evaluated.
Correction Notes
When a confirmed material error warrants a public note, the note should be clear enough for readers to understand the substance of the correction.
A correction note may explain:
- what information was incorrect;
- what the corrected information is;
- and, where useful, when the correction was made.
We do not silently make a material factual change when doing so would leave readers with a misleading impression about what was originally published.
The exact wording and placement of a correction note depend on the significance of the error.
Publication and Modification Dates
A page’s modification date should reflect a meaningful editorial change.
Correcting a material factual error or substantially updating a profile may justify updating the displayed “Last Updated” date.
Minor changes such as punctuation, formatting, or fixing a typo do not automatically justify presenting an article as newly updated.
We do not change dates solely to create an appearance of freshness.
Source Corrections and Broken Links
Web sources can move, change, or disappear after publication.
When an important source becomes unavailable, we may:
- update its URL;
- replace it with the original source;
- use another authoritative source supporting the same claim;
- or revise the affected statement if adequate evidence can no longer be established.
Replacing a dead link does not justify changing the substance of the claim unless the underlying evidence also changes.
What We Do Not Guarantee
Submitting a correction request does not guarantee:
- that the requested wording will be used;
- that an estimate will be replaced with a preferred figure;
- that an article will be removed;
- that search-engine results will change immediately;
- or that third-party websites will update information copied from or independently published about the same subject.
Our responsibility is to evaluate the information published on InternetChicksWorth.com according to our editorial standards.
Our Responsibility
Accuracy is an ongoing editorial responsibility.
Internet Chicks Worth may use research and drafting tools, including AI-assisted tools, as part of its workflow, but those tools do not determine whether a correction is accepted.
The responsible editor evaluates the evidence and remains accountable for material changes made to the published page.
Readers can learn more about our verification process in our Fact-Checking Policy and about our financial research standards in our Net Worth Methodology.
Submit a Correction
If you believe we have published a factual error, please use our Contact page.
Include the article URL, the disputed statement, the proposed correction, and the strongest supporting source available.
Clear evidence helps us review the issue accurately and efficiently.