Practical guide · Newsroom guide
Live results sometimes change after a data correction or an organizer ruling. A good correction explains what changed and why without deleting the context that readers relied on. Distinguish a feed error from a competitive ruling; those are different stories.
Find the authority
For a ruling, use the organizer statement. For an incorrect data field, compare the provider record with the completed official result. A social-media screenshot can alert you to a problem, but it should not be the sole basis for rewriting the match.
Record the difference
Keep the earlier value, corrected value, source and time of correction in an editorial note. Do not quietly turn a postponed fixture into a completed match. If the reason remains unknown, say the result was updated and leave the explanation open.
Update dependent pages
Check the match page, team history and any recap that quoted the earlier result. A corrected headline with an unchanged table creates a second inconsistency. Avoid changing unrelated historical matches just because their formatting looks similar.
Tell readers what is confirmed
Use a short visible correction with the date and link. If the organizer has announced a review but no final decision, label the outcome pending. This preserves trust while preventing an incomplete investigation from becoming a definitive result.
Use a correction ledger
Maintain a simple record with the affected URL, original claim, corrected claim, reason, primary source and correction time. This is different from a general edit history because it explains what a reader needs to know. If the change is only spelling, a prominent notice may be unnecessary. If it changes a result, opponent or competitive status, a visible note helps readers understand why the page differs from an earlier version. Keep the ledger factual and avoid assigning blame when the cause has not been established.
Distinguish pending review from a final ruling
An organizer saying that it is investigating a result does not mean the result has already been overturned. Keep the current official status and describe the review separately. If a decision later changes the outcome, update the result then and link the final statement. Do not use an accusation from a participant as a substitute for the governing decision. A newsroom can report that a claim was made while making clear who made it and what remains unverified.
Trace dependent information
A changed result may affect a bracket, team history, standings note and recap headline. List those dependencies before applying the correction. Update only the records actually affected and avoid rewriting unrelated analysis. If a downstream source has not yet refreshed, describe the mismatch rather than copying its stale value. A corrected match page with an old summary card can still mislead a reader who never opens the full article, so inspect the visible card as well as the detailed text.
Preserve the original event identity
A corrected opponent spelling or start time should not accidentally create a second match record. Use stable event identifiers where the source provides them and keep a mapping when a provider changes its record. Do not merge two fixtures simply because the same teams played close together. The competition, stage and date matter. When identity is uncertain, keep the records separate and flag the issue for review. An accurate correction should reduce ambiguity rather than erase the evidence needed to understand it.
Publish a clear note
State the important change in ordinary language: which score, status or participant was corrected and which source supports it. Include the date, and avoid vague wording that only says updated. If the earlier error affected a conclusion, explain that too. Readers do not need an internal debugging log, but they do need the factual consequence. Once the correction is visible, verify the page and any summary surfaces again. Do not claim the entire site is corrected merely because one article now contains the right value.
Close the loop with the corrected page
After a correction is accepted, revisit the public page and check the precise field that was wrong. A support acknowledgment alone does not prove that the score, date or participant name changed. Record the corrected value and the time you observed it. If an old screenshot still circulates, share the current canonical link with a neutral explanation; there is no need to repeat a misleading headline in order to correct it. For your own notes, retain a short correction history so future readers can understand why an earlier version differs. If the organizer changes its announcement again, treat that as a new update rather than assuming the first correction was permanent. Do not delete useful source context simply because a result now looks settled. A match may have a played result and a later administrative decision, and both need dates to make the sequence clear. When the available evidence remains contradictory, state the conflict and avoid publishing a definitive winner. A transparent unresolved note is more reliable than choosing whichever source was updated most recently without checking what it actually says.
Related reading and sources
Continue with Tournament directory and Match centre. Reference: Official LoL Esports schedule, checked 7 September 2026. The workflow above is editorial guidance; examples are hypothetical and are not reported test results.