Getting it right is the goal. Getting it wrong sometimes is reality. This page explains what Mr Mega does when a factual error reaches published content — how errors come to light, how we correct them, how we flag the fix to readers, and how anyone outside the team can report something that looks off.
Our corrections policy runs alongside our fact-checking policy and editorial guidelines. Fact-checking covers what happens before publication; this page is about what happens afterwards, when the information on a live page no longer matches reality.
Why a Corrections Policy Matters
Online casino content dates quickly. Bonus terms get rewritten, licences get suspended, RTP figures shift between game builds, payment methods come and go, and regulators update the rules without asking first. Even a review that was fully accurate on the day it went live can drift out of date within weeks. A corrections policy only works if it’s honest about that reality, so ours starts from the assumption that facts will change — and our job is to catch the drift quickly and fix it cleanly.
What Counts as a Correction
Not every edit to a live page is a correction. We draw a clear line between the different kinds of change so readers know what they’re looking at.
Material Corrections
A material correction is any change that moves the substance of a review, a figure, or a recommendation. That covers things like:
- A factual error about a licence, regulator, or jurisdiction
- An incorrect RTP, house edge, or bonus wagering figure
- A misattributed quote or source
- A claim about payment methods, processing times, or withdrawal limits that no longer matches reality
- A rating change driven by new information rather than a scheduled review
Material corrections are always disclosed. The page carries a revision date, and where the change is significant enough to shift what a reader takes from the page, we add a note on what was corrected.
Routine Updates
A routine update is a change that reflects normal refresh activity rather than the fixing of an error. Examples include:
- Refreshing a bonus offer when the operator launches a new one
- Adding a new payment method the operator has introduced
- Updating screenshots to match a new site design
- Adjusting a rating at a scheduled review cycle based on updated testing
Routine updates get a revision date but don’t carry a correction note, because nothing was wrong — the underlying facts changed and the content moved with them.
Minor Edits
Typos, grammar fixes, and small wording tweaks that don’t change meaning are handled silently. A missing comma isn’t an editorial issue, and treating it as one would bury the corrections that actually matter.
How Errors Reach Us
Errors come to our attention through three main channels.
Our Own Review Cycles
Every piece of Mr Mega content is revisited on a schedule. Casino reviews are checked at least once a year, and flagship guides are reviewed more often because the information they rest on moves faster. A review cycle is where most outdated facts get caught — a licence that’s been suspended since the last check, a bonus that’s been retired, an RTP that’s been reissued at a different tier.
Reports From Readers, Operators, and Regulators
Anyone can report a claim that looks wrong through our contact page. Readers flagging an outdated figure, operators pointing to a changed term, and regulators noting a compliance issue all reach us the same way, and we investigate every credible report against the relevant primary source.
Industry and Regulatory Changes
When a regulator announces a significant change — a licence suspension, a new market opening, a rule update — our team identifies the content that’s affected and works through it systematically. Events like these can trigger corrections across dozens of pages at once.
How a Correction Is Made
Once a correction is confirmed, the process runs the same way regardless of who reported it.
- Verify against a primary source. We don’t make corrections on the strength of a claim alone. The report has to hold up against the regulator register, the operator’s T&Cs, the studio paytable, or another authoritative source.
- Update the content. The affected text, figure, table, or rating is changed to match the verified information.
- Add a revision date. The page gets a revision date that reflects the correction.
- Note the correction where material. For significant corrections, a brief note explains what was changed and when.
- Cascade the change. If the corrected fact appears on other pages across the site, those are updated too rather than left carrying stale data.
What We Won’t Do
We Won’t Silently Rewrite a Review
If a Mr Mega rating has moved materially in one direction or the other, the page tells you. We don’t quietly edit old conclusions to match new ones. A review that was positive two years ago and negative today carries a revision history that reflects both — not a scrubbed surface that hides the change.
We Won’t Delete Content to Hide Errors
If a page contains a significant error, we correct it. We don’t delete the page to make the problem go away. The exception is pages that are no longer relevant — because the operator has closed, the market has changed, or the topic has been superseded — and those are retired transparently rather than quietly.
We Won’t Correct on Operator Demand Alone
Operators can report errors like anyone else, and we look into every report. But a correction request has to be backed by the same kind of primary source we’d expect from any other reporter. A marketing team asking us to soften a review isn’t evidence; a link to the updated terms of service is.
How to Report an Error
If you’ve found a claim in a Mr Mega guide that doesn’t match the primary source, let us know. The contact page is the route for corrections, tips, and queries about specific claims. A useful report gives us:
- The page URL
- The specific claim you’re flagging
- The primary source that contradicts it — a regulator register, a terms page, a studio paytable, or similar
Reports backed by a primary source move through the process faster because the verification step is already done. Reports without a source still get investigated, but we have to find the verification ourselves before we can act.
Accountability
Our corrections policy only means something if readers can hold us to it. Every correction is dated, significant ones are noted on the page, and the revision history is preserved rather than overwritten. If you think a correction should have been made and wasn’t — or a correction was made and wasn’t disclosed properly — tell us. The contact page is open for that kind of feedback too.
