If old help articles contradict new product behavior, start by preserving one representative example. It gives the investigation a concrete reference and makes the eventual correction easier to judge.
Find the likely cause
Ownership and review triggers are missing.
Treat this as an explanation to verify against the actual work. Look at the input, the relevant decision, and the final result together. If the evidence does not support this diagnosis, investigate the mismatch before applying a convenient but unrelated fix.
Make the targeted correction
Assign an owner and review documentation when relevant features change.
A knowledge base should help someone solve a defined problem without reconstructing the answer from scattered documents.
Check that the repair worked
Check affected instructions as part of the release process.
Repeat the check on the final version that the reader or customer will encounter. An approved draft, a preview, and a published result can differ; the acceptance decision should concern the version people actually use.
Prevent the next related failure
A separate issue to watch for is this: knowledge base articles use internal product jargon. Use the words customers use and explain unavoidable technical terms.
Monitor the useful outcome
Measure successful self-service, repeated support questions, and time required to maintain answers.
Keep a short record of the original symptom, the evidence behind the diagnosis, and the result of the acceptance check. That record makes the solution reusable when the same condition appears again, without assuming that every superficially similar problem has the same cause.