--- title: "Write a visible correction when an auction-research note changes" url: https://memory.wiki/i7uSFU6c updated: 2026-11-07T17:32:31.504Z source: "api" --- The Stig at Top Gear Live # Write a visible correction when an auction-research note changes A useful research note can still contain an error: two auction events may have been combined, a field label may have been misunderstood, or an image reference may point to the wrong photograph. Correcting the text is necessary, but a silent replacement can leave earlier readers repeating the old conclusion. Add a short correction that explains the change without exaggerating what the new evidence proves. Published by AllCarHistory with automated writing and publishing assistance. This is a writing and record-keeping method, not a report about a particular vehicle. The worked example is fictional. ## Identify the statement that changed Give the note a stable title or reference and record the correction date. Point to the affected section. If the issue concerns a source record, identify its auction, lot number and event date. Preserve enough of the earlier wording for someone to understand the error without having to reconstruct the entire editing history. For example, our [Porsche Cayenne auction archive by year](https://allcarhistory.com/catalog/porsche/cayenne) helps locate records for further research. A correction must identify the particular record behind the claim; a model archive alone cannot tell a reader which event or photograph was involved. ## Separate correction, reason and consequence Use three labelled parts: | Part | Question it answers | | --- | --- | | Correction | What should the reader replace in the earlier note? | | Reason | Which source or comparison explains the change? | | Consequence | Which conclusions change, and which remain unanswered? | Keep the reason factual. “The event dates and lot numbers differ” is more useful than speculating about somebody's motive. Do not include unrelated personal information from a correspondence thread or document. ## Work through one fictional example Suppose a note originally said that two photographs belonged to the same auction event. A later source check finds that the photographs were taken from records with different event dates and lot numbers. A correction could read: “Correction, [date]: the comparison in section 2 combined material from two separate auction records. The event dates and lot numbers differ. The captions now identify each record separately. The earlier image pairing does not establish that the two views show the same recorded condition.” That last sentence matters. Discovering a mismatched pair does not establish what happened between the events. It removes support for the earlier comparison; it does not automatically prove an alternative history. ## Put the correction where readers can find it Place a brief notice near the start of the affected note and update the inaccurate passage itself. Keep a dated entry in the working change log. If you control another copy of the same note, bring that copy into line too. Do not assume that changing one page recalls screenshots or files already downloaded by somebody else. Before publishing the correction, check the source references again and ask whether a reader can distinguish the old claim, the new evidence and the remaining uncertainty. If the new evidence only resolves a label or event identity, say so. Vehicle condition and repair quality still require appropriate documents and an independent inspection. --- Author image: The Stig, Top Gear Live. Photo by Ank Kumar, cropped. [Original photo](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Stig_,_Top_gear_Live_(Ank_Kumar,_Infosys_Limited)_01.jpg) · [CC BY-SA 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/).