Riot Updates

Publication standards

Editorial and Corrections Policy

The standard is not whether a statement sounds plausible. It is whether the visible wording is supported, scoped, dated, and fair to the available record.

Effective

Core commitment

Riot Updates publishes independently curated pages, links claims to underlying records, discloses meaningful uncertainty, and corrects confirmed errors. A source’s authority is limited to what that source can actually establish.

Correction channel is not yet operational The intended address is listed on the contact page, but it must be activated and tested through Cloudflare Email Routing before launch. Until that happens, Riot Updates should not represent the address as a working way to submit corrections.

Independence and affiliation

Riot Updates is an independent publication and is not affiliated with Riot Games, Tencent, or another covered subject. A company statement may be quoted or cited because it is relevant evidence, not because the company controls the page. Covered subjects do not receive an editorial veto.

A material employment, financial, sponsorship, family, personal, or other conflict that could reasonably affect a page should be disclosed with that page. Sponsorship or paid placement, if ever used, must be clearly labeled and kept separate from factual conclusions.

Sourcing and attribution

  • Prefer the strongest available source for the kind of claim being made.
  • Link to the original filing, order, announcement, paper, or report where it is publicly available.
  • Use first-party records for what a subject said or did; do not present them as independent proof of a disputed outcome.
  • Attribute allegations and contested claims to the source making them.
  • Do not turn an absence of evidence into evidence of absence.
  • Preserve meaningful qualifiers, measurement definitions, dates, and procedural posture.

The corrected controlled Riot Games bibliography contains 100 entries, 63 of which are published by Riot Games. This concentration is disclosed because direct company records are useful for announcements and release history but leave a greater need for independent evidence on disputed or evaluative questions.

Publication decisions

The supplied research corpus is a starting input, not a publish queue. Its package is incomplete and the included validation record is stale. Public pages are selected and edited independently from files that can be inspected. Unsupported drafts, duplicated source bundles, orphaned claims, and time-sensitive rows without a current check should be held back rather than made public for volume alone.

Corrections

A useful correction identifies the page, the precise passage or data row, why it may be wrong, and the strongest available source. Once a factual error is confirmed, the visible text should be corrected promptly. A material correction should include a dated note explaining the substance of the change; minor spelling, style, or formatting fixes need not carry a correction note when they do not change meaning.

Requests to remove accurate, relevant reporting are evaluated on their merits and are not treated as corrections merely because the subject dislikes the coverage. New evidence, changed circumstances, privacy risks, and legal obligations may justify an update, contextual note, restriction, or removal.

Fairness and responses

For serious contested claims, the page should present the relevant response when it is available and materially informs the issue. The absence of a response should not be described as agreement. If a meaningful response arrives after publication, it should be evaluated and added when it improves accuracy or context.

Updates and versioning

Mutable facts should carry a research cutoff or last-checked date. Historical records should not be silently overwritten by a later status. When a product, proceeding, ownership disclosure, or other tracked subject changes, the new dated state should be added and affected summaries, tables, metadata, and structured data should be checked together.

Automation and artificial intelligence

Automation is limited to assisting with formatting and mechanical checks, such as identifying duplicate IDs, malformed links, inconsistent labels, missing fields, or row-count differences. Automation is never evidence. It cannot be cited as proof, and generated wording cannot replace inspection of the underlying record. A public claim must stand on attributable evidence or be clearly marked as editorial analysis.

Privacy, safety, and sensitive material

Publication should minimize unnecessary personal information, particularly for private individuals. Contact details, account identifiers, or sensitive personal data should not be reproduced merely because they appear in a source. Public-interest value, relevance, accuracy, potential harm, and applicable law should be considered before including sensitive material.

Changes to this policy

Substantive changes should update the effective date shown above. This policy describes Riot Updates’ editorial standard; it does not certify that the incomplete source package itself satisfies every standard.