Hair-care information can change after an article is published.
A shampoo may be reformulated. An ingredient list may change. A brand may revise its instructions, discontinue a product, alter a claim or introduce a different formula in another country. New scientific research or regulatory guidance may also affect how a topic should be explained.
AGoodShampoo treats corrections as part of normal editorial maintenance.
Our goal is not to preserve an old version of an article simply because it has already been published. When reliable information shows that a material fact is wrong, outdated or misleading, the article should be corrected.
This policy explains what we correct, how updates are handled and how readers, brands, manufacturers and professionals can report possible errors.
What We Correct
A correction may be appropriate when published information is factually wrong, materially outdated or likely to give readers an inaccurate understanding of a product or hair-care issue.
Examples include:
- incorrect ingredient information
- an outdated or incomplete ingredient list
- an incorrect product name or product variation
- a confirmed product reformulation
- an important regional formulation difference
- outdated manufacturer instructions
- an incorrect statement about how a product should be used
- a misleading product comparison
- an inaccurate scientific interpretation
- incorrect attribution of a manufacturer claim
- incorrect availability or discontinuation information when relevant to the article
- a material spelling error that changes the meaning or identification of a product, ingredient, brand or scientific term
- outdated regulatory or safety information
- incorrect certification information
- statements that confuse cosmetic effects with medical treatment
A correction can also be warranted when the facts themselves have not changed but the way they were explained could materially mislead a reader.
For example, if an article says an ingredient has been proven to regrow hair when the cited evidence only involved laboratory research on hair fibers, that would require correction.
What May Not Require a Formal Correction
Not every edit is a factual correction.
Minor editorial changes may include:
- fixing ordinary spelling or grammar
- improving sentence clarity
- repairing formatting
- replacing a broken internal link
- improving a heading
- removing repetition
- updating punctuation
- making a sentence easier to understand without changing its meaning
These changes may be made without treating the article as materially revised.
A difference of opinion also does not automatically qualify as a correction.
For example, a manufacturer may disagree with AGoodShampoo’s conclusion that a shampoo is too strongly cleansing for some dry or chemically processed hair. If the product facts and reasoning are accurate, the brand’s disagreement with the editorial judgment does not require us to change the conclusion.
Minor Editorial Corrections and Material Factual Updates
We distinguish between minor editorial corrections and material factual updates.
A minor editorial correction fixes presentation without substantially changing the reader’s understanding of the product or topic.
Examples include grammar, formatting, wording improvements or correcting a small typo that does not affect meaning.
A material factual update changes information that could affect a reader’s decision, understanding or expectations.
Examples include:
- replacing an outdated ingredient list
- correcting the identity of the product reviewed
- updating a major reformulation
- correcting a scientific claim
- revising a recommendation because the formula changed
- correcting outdated manufacturer directions
- adding an important regional formula difference
- revising a medical-adjacent statement that was too strong or inaccurate
When a material update is made, the article’s review date may also be updated to reflect that the page has been meaningfully reassessed.
A review date should not be changed simply to make an older article appear fresh.
Product Reformulations
Product reformulation is one of the most common reasons hair-care content becomes outdated.
Manufacturers may change:
- surfactants
- conditioning agents
- preservatives
- fragrance
- oils
- proteins
- silicones
- botanical ingredients
- usage directions
- product positioning
A product may also retain the same name while the formula changes.
When a meaningful reformulation is confirmed, AGoodShampoo may update the ingredient analysis, product suitability discussion and editorial judgment.
We do not assume that conclusions based on an older formula automatically apply to the newer version.
Regional differences may also require correction or clarification. A product sold under the same name in different countries may not always have the same ingredient list.
When this affects the analysis, the relevant market should be identified where possible.
Scientific and Medical Updates
Scientific understanding can change.
New research may improve, weaken or complicate an earlier interpretation of an ingredient, treatment or scalp condition.
AGoodShampoo may revise an article when stronger scientific evidence becomes available or when existing research has been misinterpreted.
Updates may also be appropriate when guidance changes from:
- government health agencies
- regulatory authorities
- professional medical organizations
- ingredient safety organizations
- recognized scientific bodies
We pay particular attention to hair-loss, scalp and medical-adjacent content.
Cosmetic effects such as shine, softness, reduced friction or reduced breakage should not be presented as proof of hair regrowth or treatment of scalp disease.
If an article crosses that line incorrectly, it should be corrected.
How to Submit a Correction
Readers, brands, manufacturers, researchers and professionals can submit correction requests through the AGoodShampoo Contact page.
A useful correction request should include:
- the URL of the article
- the specific statement that may be wrong or outdated
- an explanation of the issue
- supporting evidence when available
Depending on the correction, useful documentation may include:
- an official product page
- a current ingredient list
- a dated manufacturer statement
- updated usage instructions
- packaging showing a changed formula
- a regulatory source
- a peer-reviewed study
- an official certification source
We may ask for additional documentation when a correction cannot be verified from the information initially provided.
We do not promise a fixed response time because some issues can be checked quickly while others require more detailed source verification.
Commercial Influence and Corrections
Brands and manufacturers are welcome to provide factual evidence.
They cannot purchase, demand or negotiate a favorable editorial conclusion through the corrections process.
For example, a company may provide an updated ingredient list showing that an article discusses an outdated formula. If verified, that factual information should be corrected.
The company cannot require AGoodShampoo to change an independent judgment about value, suitability, formulation strength or limitations simply because it disagrees with the review.
Advertising, affiliate relationships, sponsorships or other commercial relationships should not determine whether a correction is accepted or rejected.
The same factual standard applies whether or not a commercial relationship exists.
Significant Changes to Existing Articles
Some updates require more than changing one sentence.
A substantial revision may be necessary when:
- the product has been significantly reformulated
- the original analysis used the wrong formula
- new evidence changes the main conclusion
- a product is renamed or replaced
- medical or safety information needs substantial correction
- the article contains several outdated product facts
- a comparison is no longer fair because one of the products has changed
In these situations, AGoodShampoo may reassess the article as a whole.
That can include reviewing current product information, checking new sources, revisiting the formula analysis and changing the final editorial judgment if necessary.
The review date may then be updated to reflect the meaningful revision.
Corrections are not treated as a weakness in the editorial process. Hair-care products and evidence change, and maintaining useful content means changing the article when the facts change.
Readers should expect AGoodShampoo to correct factual errors, disclose meaningful uncertainty, update materially changed product information and keep editorial judgment separate from commercial pressure.