Biznax aims to provide accurate, useful information for supplier research and purchasing preparation. When published material is wrong, incomplete in a misleading way, or no longer current, it should be examined and corrected appropriately. This policy covers supplier profiles, buying guides, glossary entries, templates, images, and tools available on the site.
Please use the Contact Us page to report a possible error. Include the page URL, the statement or field concerned, an explanation of the issue, and supporting evidence. Official company pages, dated documents, product specifications, and other identifiable sources help us assess a request.
For supplier-profile changes, please identify the company and explain whether you represent it. Representation may help establish context, but proposed changes still require supporting information. Share only what is necessary; avoid sending confidential quotations, customer records, passwords, or proprietary specifications.
Reports are considered according to the evidence and the importance of the information affected. Review may involve checking the original source, comparing newer records, examining dates and context, or requesting clarification. A company-published claim should remain distinguishable from an independently checked fact.
Issues affecting company identity, certification claims, important specifications, or purchasing calculations deserve particular attention. Where a significant concern cannot be resolved immediately, appropriate action may include qualifying a statement, adding a notice, temporarily restricting a feature, or removing unsupported material while it is examined.
Review times vary with complexity and the availability of reliable information. A report does not automatically establish an error or require a particular change.
A correction addresses information that was inaccurate when published. An update reflects a subsequent change, such as a new website, revised product range, or changed business address. A clarification improves wording or context that could reasonably cause misunderstanding.
These distinctions matter when explaining a revision. A supplier changing its offering does not necessarily mean an earlier, correctly dated description was wrong. Historical material should retain a clear time context.
Corrections to supplier records should reflect the scope of the evidence. Confirming a website address does not establish production capacity or validate a certificate. If a claim cannot be supported, it should be removed, qualified, or marked as unconfirmed.
Requests to amend or remove a profile are assessed on their substance. Commercial preferences and paid relationships must not determine factual conclusions. Disagreements about an individual transaction may require information beyond the scope of a reference profile; Biznax’s correction process does not resolve contractual disputes.
When reporting a tool problem, include the inputs, displayed result, expected result, and relevant units or assumptions. Use a non-confidential example where possible.
A confirmed calculation or software error should prompt review of the affected formula, examples, and related guidance. Corrections to downloadable resources may require a revised file and version information. Relevant connected pages should also be checked.
Material corrections should carry a visible note explaining what changed and when. Routine spelling, formatting, or broken-link repairs generally do not require a separate notice unless they affect meaning. Updating a review date alone is not an adequate explanation for a substantive correction.
Errors involving AI-assisted text, images, or software follow the same process. Human editorial responsibility remains in place regardless of how an error originated.
If you believe a response overlooks important evidence, you may request further review through the Contact Us page and explain what should be reconsidered. This policy may be updated as Biznax’s content and features develop.