BC-0298 · TROUBLESHOOTING
Editorial review 2026-09-27
What to Check Before Republishing a Removed Game
Before republishing a removed game, reconcile the current official action with the actual revised candidate. Keep the removed version, remediation work and any later review result separate. A locally corrected copy does not itself end a restriction or authorize another upload.
Symptom
The creator has a revised candidate after removal and wants to know what remains before a legitimate new publication.
Immediate action
Reconcile the current official action, removed version and revised candidate without assuming correction grants permission.
Diagnostic branches
- A restriction or required review remains unresolved.
- Follow that official process before attempting an alternate publication route.
- A cited issue or connected reference remains.
- Keep remediation incomplete and inspect the actual candidate.
- Post-edit evidence is being used to describe the removed version.
- Correct its timing and purpose; distinguish remediation evidence from evidence about the original decision.
Least-destructive change
Preserve version and case records, avoid evasive duplicates and make only legitimate substantive remediation.
Retest
- Evidence refers to the version it actually depicts.
- Unresolved restrictions and content issues remain visible.
- The checklist is not represented as platform permission or approval.
Escalation
Use the current notice or official assistance for unclear permission. Do not substitute a renamed upload or a new account for resolution of the original action.
Working notes
Preserve the notice's identity, affected object and available process. Determine what current official instruction or result applies before planning another publication. Do not infer permission from silence, a visible button or an unverified report that another creator succeeded.
Link each identified issue to a real change and its verification. Mark content that remains unresolved, related references elsewhere in the experience, and any new material added during correction. A broader redesign creates additional things to review; it is not automatically safer because it looks different.
Keep a version comparison that does not misrepresent evidence. The removed candidate shows what was actioned; the revised candidate shows proposed remediation. A screenshot taken after a change cannot prove the removed version lacked the original issue. Label timing and context honestly in any official explanation.
If a legitimate path to publish is available, follow its current requirements and record the result. Do not recreate the same disallowed experience under another account or identifier. A later successful publication is an actual outcome to verify, not something this checklist can preauthorize.
Examples
- Evidence timing: an image of the corrected scene is useful to show remediation, but not to prove that the removed candidate always contained that correction.
- Candidate review: the cited reference was removed from the main scene but remains in a thumbnail. Keep that issue open rather than marking the whole remediation complete.