How to handle incorrect quotations from 3rd party sources

Question

In this answer, the quote provided from Roll20 incorrectly capitalizes the "a" in attack.

In this situation, should we:

1. Fix the quote so it's correct but leave the citation link
2. Fix the quote so it's correct and link or cite a source that is correct
3. Leave it alone and let downvotes sort out the inaccuracy
4. Something else

Answer 1

When you're quoting something, it's important to quote it accurately—don't misrepresent the source as saying something it doesn't. However, we can add revision, or indicate that there is an inaccuracy in the quote.

Let's work with an example here: A well-known RPG has a line that says:

You must foo the sprocket.

A theoretical third party source called Roll6 accidentally wrote “bar” instead of “foo” (oops!):

You must bar the sprocket.

What not to do

Don't revise the quote and present it like that's the original text.

You must foo the sprocket. — Roll6 SRD

You're misrepresenting the source. This is generally considered unethical from an editorial point of view.

Good ways to resolve an error in a quoted source

Notify the source they have an error! If you can edit it (like with Wikipedia), double-check your official sources then edit the third-party source to represent the official sources correctly.

As for citing an incorrect third-party source:

1. Find a different, more accurate source which does not have the error, such as the official source. Cite and quote that instead:

   You must foo the sprocket. — Example RPG core rules, page 7

2. Indicate the error with a (sic) marker, in which case you may write in your post:

   You must bar (sic) the sprocket. — Roll6 SRD

   Note: Roll6 incorrectly says we bar the sprocket, but should be saying we foo it.

3. Indicate your correction by using square brackets, and note the correction you made:

   You must [foo] the sprocket. — Roll6 SRD

   (Note the original sources says to foo, which I'm correcting here. Roll6 has an error in its transcription.)

   Square brackets aren't exclusively a tool for correction, but they're there for when we're adding or changing words to make it clear that is our change and not in the original quote.

I prefer approach #1 since it avoids all the extra effort involved in #2 or #3, but if that's not possible then #2 or #3 are about equal.

Answer 2

As it is a quote it should be preserved the way the original is - everything else is simply wrong from an ethical standpoint by saying "Some other person said this" when in fact you know they didn't. That the source is wrong is a different problem, but when you want to use this source or the author of the answer wants to use it, the quote should be preserved the way it is.

The usual thing to do in academic papers that need citations is to point out that something is different from the original or that something in the original is wrong and you realized it, but still want to quote it because it's still relevant.

You could for example add a [sic] after a typo to show that the typo was in the original text, that you have seen it and that you are aware that, according to current rules, this should be changed. For this specific example adding a [sic] and then explaining in the normal text after the quote why you added this little bit and what the difficulties with roll20 are would be perfect to show the reader what the problem is.

Another way would be to write something like [a]ttack and then mention why you changed the capitalization.

Or, to be very explicit, you could add something like:

Attack [this should be lowercase attack - see [this meta discussion](link/to/this/discussion) for more].

It might also be a good idea to add a comment, poiting out the problems and the correct capitalization that is used in books/ official sources. Maybe even poiting to a better source they can use for their claim. The OP can then decide whether to use the source you provided or the one they originally used.