What can be challenged
You can submit evidence relating to a mine or project name, mineral classification, operating status, operator or ownership relationship, map location, district or province, source attribution, historical context, or a missing public source.
The fastest route is the Report intelligence workflow. Include the source URL or document reference whenever possible.
Review workflow
Submissions enter a private review queue and are not published automatically. The review sequence is: submitted → reviewed → corroborated where necessary → accepted, qualified or rejected → published with provenance. Material changes retain enough history to explain what changed and why.
Evidence standard
Corrections based on official records, primary company disclosures, technical reports, reputable geological publications or other directly relevant evidence receive greater weight than unsupported assertions. A company or landholder may also provide clarifying evidence, but the Atlas still distinguishes a self-published statement from an official legal record.
Disputes
If ownership, title, location or status is genuinely disputed, the Atlas shows that uncertainty rather than forcing a false single answer. ZimMineral is not a forum for adjudicating legal rights.
Sensitive reports
Exact coordinates from unverified or sensitive submissions are not automatically exposed publicly. Locations may be generalised to district or regional precision where publication could create risks involving trespass, illegal extraction, safety, environmental harm or community conflict.
Correction record
Accepted changes capture the review date, source, reason for change and relevant superseded values so users can understand the provenance of the current record. Where the available evidence cannot support a definitive replacement value, the Atlas records the uncertainty instead of manufacturing certainty.