Source Corrections

How creators and authorized representatives can request corrections to public source signals used across JuicyScout, JuicyIndex, and JuicyPulse.

Policy Desk

Regulation & Compliance

May 2, 2026·4 min read

JuicyScout, JuicyIndex, and JuicyPulse use public or creator-submitted signals to support discovery, comparison, and editorial pages. Source corrections help keep those signals accurate, current, and safer to display.

This page explains what can be corrected, what evidence is useful, and when a correction should become a claim, removal, suppression, or safety escalation request.

What Can Be Corrected

Correction requests may cover:

Display name or username.
Official creator links.
Bio or profile description.
Avatar, banner, or public profile image references.
Category, niche, or tag labels.
Public price or free-account signals.
Broad location labels.
Profile freshness or last-observed context.
Duplicate, stale, or impersonating source records.
Broken links, redirects, or links that no longer belong to the creator.

Corrections should not ask us to publish private contact details, exact location, government IDs, private account data, subscriber-only content, or claims that cannot be supported by safe public evidence.

Evidence That Helps

Useful correction evidence may include:

The affected URL on JuicyScout, JuicyIndex, or JuicyPulse.
The official public creator profile URL.
The source URL where the corrected public signal appears.
A short explanation of what is wrong and what should replace it.
A screenshot only when a public source cannot be captured through a normal URL.
A creator-controlled verification signal when the change affects ownership, official links, location, or safety-sensitive fields.

If a correction changes control of a profile or official-link confidence, we will route it through claim evidence review rather than treating it as a routine edit.

Review Standards

Our reviewers will check:

Whether the proposed correction is visible on a public or creator-submitted source.
Whether the new source appears official, current, and connected to the creator.
Whether the change would expose sensitive personal information.
Whether the field should be hidden instead of corrected.
Whether a source should be blocked because it repeatedly produces unsafe or inaccurate records.
Whether the issue should be escalated for safety, DMCA, legal, or impersonation review.

When public sources conflict, prefer the creator-controlled source or suppress the disputed field until confidence improves.

Correction Outcomes

Support may:

Update the visible field.
Add or change an official public link.
Remove a stale or misleading source.
Hide a sensitive field.
Replace exact wording with a broader safer label.
Send the requester to claim, removal, suppression appeal, DMCA, or safety escalation workflows.
Decline unsupported changes that conflict with source confidence or safety standards.

We should not promise immediate updates, guaranteed acceptance, or fixed response times.

When to Use Another Workflow

Use a creator claim workflow when the requester wants ongoing control or official-link changes.

Use creator removal when the creator or authorized representative wants the profile removed from discovery.

Use safety escalation when the correction involves minors, non-consensual content, exploitation, doxxing, impersonation, exact location, threats, or urgent offline risk.

Use suppression appeal when the profile or field was already hidden and the requester wants that decision reviewed.

FAQ

Can a creator correct a price or free-account signal?

Yes, if the request is supported by a current public or creator-submitted source. Prices and promotions can change quickly, so the displayed field should avoid implying a guaranteed current offer.

Can a source correction change an official link?

Sometimes. If the change affects ownership or official-link confidence, we will ask for creator-controlled evidence before updating the link.

What if two public sources disagree?

Our reviewers will prefer safer creator-controlled evidence, show appropriate staleness context, or suppress the disputed field until confidence improves.