CoinGecko and CoinMarketCap warnings: 5 checks before you submit

5 evidence items set up a clean correction

5 items | 1 evidence file | 1 correction request.

Start with the notice as it appears on the listing. Save its exact wording, the affected asset, the profile URL, and a screenshot. This record keeps the original issue visible while you investigate.

Compare the profile with current project sources before editing anything. Record each mismatch as a profile value, corrected value, and evidence link. Then sort facts from assumptions. Do not rewrite a field just because it looks outdated.

Your first file should contain:

• Notice: exact text and a dated screenshot.
• Field: the profile item that appears incorrect.
• Correction: the specific replacement or clarification requested.
• Source: a public page or record supporting that change.
• History: relevant migration, rebrand, or prior submission details.

Keep unrelated material out. The reviewer should trace each request to its source without reading a project overview. For platform-specific submission context, compare the CoinGecko listing guide with the CoinMarketCap listing guide.

Which profile mismatch needs which proof?

4 common mismatch types call for different evidence. These are practical checks, not a shared warning taxonomy. Read the platform's notice and inspect the affected listing field.

For a contract or chain change, show how the old and current details relate. For supply, explain what the stated figure includes and excludes. A working website link does not prove a supply figure; use evidence that supports the specific claim.

Before choosing a route, check the relevant CoinGecko profile steps or CoinMarketCap profile steps. Keep separate corrections distinct when they need different evidence.

3 checks before you edit a listing

3 checks prevent a correction from creating a second mismatch: identity, source consistency, and reproducibility. Compare project-controlled pages with the listing before sending any request.

• Identity check: confirm the token name, ticker, chain, and contract refer to the same asset.
• Source check: open the website, explorer, and official channels linked from the profile.
• Consistency check: compare supply terms and project details across current materials.
• Change check: note a migration, contract update, or rebrand that explains different values.
• Access check: make sure cited pages open without private permissions.

Supply needs its own pass. Name the supply measure, token, chain, contract, calculation date, and method. Show the values included and excluded. Explain material locked or burned amounts only when they affect the figure under review. A total without a method leaves the reader unable to reproduce it.

For a wider view of profile upkeep, see listings and verification. For supply verification on CoinGecko, follow the same source trail. Each figure should lead back to public evidence.

How do you send a correction a reviewer can trace?

5 steps turn a suspected mismatch into a specific correction request. Keep the platform, field, and supporting source together from capture through follow-up.

1. Capture the notice: save its exact wording, profile URL, and screenshot.
2. Classify the field: identify whether the concern is identity, supply, markets, or project details.
3. Correct your source: update inaccurate project-controlled information before asking for a profile change.
4. Build the evidence file: pair each requested edit with a public source or reproducible calculation.
5. Submit and log: use the relevant official platform route, then save the message and attachments.

Write one sentence explaining the mismatch and one sentence stating the requested correction. Add a direct source for each claim. If a migration matters, include the old and current contract details with the public explanation connecting them.

Keep the exact submitted version. If a platform asks a follow-up question, answer against the same source file. Avoid sending competing versions with different facts. A listing profile remediation review can help organize the comparison and evidence before your team submits.

Platform status stays outside your evidence file

2 things remain under project control: the accuracy of project materials and the quality of the evidence submitted. CoinGecko and CoinMarketCap decide their own review, profile display, and warning status. No adviser can promise a changed status or a review time.

Use these checks while a request is pending:

• Record the submission date and save the exact message.
• Keep a copy of every source and attachment sent.
• Route follow-up questions to the person who owns the source facts.
• Update the evidence file when a verified project fact changes.

Do not send repeated versions just to add activity. Send a new correction when you have new evidence or a specific answer to a platform request. Keep the original notice and submission record together, so each later response can be checked against what came before.

For related listing work, review the options in listings and verification. The useful outcome is a traceable correction package, not a prediction about how a platform will label the profile.

5 items give DigitalMedia1 a useful starting point

5 items let DigitalMedia1 review the issue without guessing. Send the platform name, profile URL, exact notice, contract or asset link, and any prior submission record. Include the field you believe needs correction and the source that supports your view.

A focused review compares the visible profile with your evidence, then lists gaps to resolve before submission. We can flag inconsistent terminology, missing source links, and calculations that need a clearer method. You approve any correction before it goes to the platform.

For a cost estimate, the quote uses 3 factors. They are the platform, the evidence to check, and the number of corrections. You receive a fixed written quote within 2 working days, before payment. For an overview of the work, see listing profile remediation and remediation pricing.

Send: platform, profile URL, exact notice, contract link, and prior correspondence. DigitalMedia1 replies within 1 working day, then confirms the review plan.

How it works

1. 1 — Capture the noticeSave the exact wording, profile URL, affected field, and screenshot. Keep this record unchanged while you investigate.
2. 2 — Classify the mismatchCheck identity, supply, market references, project details, and source access. Separate confirmed facts from assumptions.
3. 3 — Correct project sourcesUpdate inaccurate project-controlled pages first. Keep the replacement facts consistent across relevant channels.
4. 4 — Assemble proofPair each requested correction with a direct source or reproducible calculation. Remove unrelated claims and outdated attachments.
5. 5 — Submit and logUse the relevant platform route. Save the exact message and attachments, then track any follow-up against the same file.