What has been corrected here?
None yet — the register has been open for 22 days and nothing has needed correcting. When something does it is struck through in place, dated in the public register, and never deleted.
Anything published often enough is eventually wrong, and a site reporting on an unreleased game through intermediaries will be wrong more often than most. What separates a reference from a rumour mill is not the error rate — it is whether the errors leave a trace. So the commitment is narrow and checkable: nothing published on GTA6Notes is deleted to hide a mistake. Not the claim, not the grade it carried, not the source it rested on. No entry has ever been deleted from the register.
What counts as an error here
Four kinds, and the second is the one that matters most on a site like this — a claim can be perfectly true and still be graded wrong, and a single over-graded claim devalues every other grade on the site.
| Kind of error | What it looks like | What happens to it |
|---|---|---|
| A claim that is false | The sentence says something that is not the case, whatever grade it carries. | Regraded and struck through, or withdrawn if it turns out to rest on nothing. Dated in the register. |
| A grade that is too high | The claim may well be true, but the material behind it does not reach the grade printed on it. | Regraded downward. This is the error most worth reporting, and the one least often noticed. |
| A source that does not say what we say it says | A misread quote, a figure attributed to the wrong party, a relay cited as original reporting. | The citation is fixed, and the claim is re-graded from whatever the source actually supports. |
| A claim that has gone stale | True when published, overtaken since. On this subject, dates and platform lists are the usual casualties. | Marked superseded and dated. Not struck through as false — it was not false, it is finished. |
Not an error, however firmly it is put to us: that a claim graded rumoured is in fact true. It may be. Promotion needs first-party material, and nothing else — not a track record, not the passage of time, and not the number of other sites that have already promoted it. The order of precedence is on the source policy.
What happens to a correction
Five steps, and no anchor changes at any of them.
- The original stays where it was. A claim is a citable unit with its own anchor, and somebody arriving from a three-month-old link has to land on the correction rather than on a page that has quietly been rewritten around them.
- It is regraded, not deleted. A claim contradicted by first-party material becomes debunked and is struck through in place, carrying the material that contradicted it. A claim that was true and has been overtaken is marked superseded and dated instead — it was not false.
- The anchor survives. The identifier a claim is deep-linked by does not change when its grade does. That is the entire reason a correction is findable at all.
- The change is dated in public, on the changelog, with what it said before, what it says now, and what moved it. Entries are added to that register and never edited afterwards.
- The page's "last checked" date moves, and the plain-text mirror is regenerated from the corrected page, so the version a machine reads cannot lag behind the version a person reads.
There is a standing illustration of why the register matters, and it is not hypothetical: a first-party plan, stated publicly, changed inside a day. A site that simply replaced its page would have erased both the statement and the change.
Trailer 1 had been scheduled for 5 December 2023 at 9am ET and was brought forward after a watermarked copy leaked on X. Confirmed. Forbes, .
What Rockstar posted was: "Our trailer has leaked so please watch the real thing on YouTube." That is why sources to this day disagree over whether the first trailer was a 4 or a 5 December release, and it is why both states are still on this site. A page that had been overwritten with the answer that turned out to be true would have destroyed the only evidence that there had ever been a question.
How fast
A claim contradicted by new first-party material is regraded as part of covering that material — the correction and the news are the same edit, so it happens on the same day. An error in a citation is fixed as soon as it is established. Neither is held for a convenient moment, and neither waits on a batch.
Beyond that, the whole fact base is re-checked against its sources rather than left to drift, and every page prints the date that check last happened; this one was checked on . A page whose stamp is months old is telling you something true about itself, which is the point of printing it.
Corrections issued so far
None. The site was first published on 22 August 2026, and an empty correction register that has been open for 22 days is what an empty correction register should look like. It is published now, before it is needed, because one created on the day it first becomes necessary is one nobody has any reason to believe.
Separately, the site currently carries 4 claims that were widely repeated and are contradicted by first-party material. Those are corrections to the record rather than to us, and they are kept visible on exactly the same principle — printed here as the record now stands, struck through, each with the material that contradicted it.
Claims in mid-2026 that the game would slip again into 2027 have no first-party backing. Debunked. Dexerto, .
Circulated by YouTube and social-media "insiders". Contradicted by Take-Two reaffirming 19 November 2026 on 21 May 2026 and again on 7 August 2026.
Claims that GTA VI is confirmed for Switch 2 are false. Debunked. GameSpot, .
Contradicted by Rockstar's own platform list, which names only PS5 and Xbox Series X|S.
Claims that the boxed edition includes a playable disc are wrong. Debunked. Push Square, .
Contradicted by Rockstar's own product description. Recorded because retailer listings early on implied a disc.
Claims that an online mode ships alongside the game on 19 November 2026 are unsupported. Debunked. GamesRadar+, .
Contradicted by first-party product descriptions that name only a single-player experience.
Each is set out beside the material that contradicted it on the debunked page.
Reporting an error to us
This is an open question about this site rather than about the game, and it is published the same way every other open question here is published: as an answer, with the date it opened and the thing that would end it.
No route for reporting an error to GTA6Notes has been published. Not known. Open since ; statements to cite: this page, and nothing else. Would settle it: a published route, announced here and dated on the changelog. This site, about itself.
No route is published. This site carries no contact form, no email address, no comment thread and no account anywhere that it can claim as its own — and rather than print one that does not exist, or invite reports into a channel nobody is reading, the gap is stated.
That is a real limitation and it is not dressed up as a design principle. What can be said for it is that the alternative most sites choose — a form that files reports into an inbox nobody opens — is worse, because it looks like accountability and functions as a wastebasket. When a reporting route exists it will be published on this page and recorded on the changelog with the date it opened.
What you can do instead, today
The site is built to be checked rather than trusted, and that machinery works whether or not anybody can write to us:
- Follow the source. Every claim names the material it came from and links to it where that material is public. If the source does not say what the claim says, the claim is wrong — and you can establish that without our help.
- Check the grade, not just the sentence. Ask whether the material named could support the grade printed on it. That is the question this site can most plausibly get wrong.
- Read the date. Every claim carries the date of its source and every page the date it was last checked. On this subject an unstamped statement is worth very little.
- Read the plain text. Every page exists a second time at the same address with
.mdin place of the trailing slash, generated from the rendered page. It is the fastest way to diff what a page says now against what you quoted.
Whether a correction has been made, and when, is answerable without contacting anybody: the changelog is the record, and it is added to rather than edited.
Takedowns, rights and the material this site refuses
GTA6Notes is an independent reference and is not affiliated with Rockstar Games or Take-Two Interactive. It hosts no leaked material of any kind, uses no official artwork, logos or trailer frames, and illustrates itself entirely with original photography made for this site — including any picture that shows a person, who is invented, and is labelled as invented in visible text wherever they appear.
The reasoning behind that refusal, and the fact that a takedown is a legal reflex rather than an authentication of anything, is set out on the source policy. The list of what will never appear here is on the method page.