Corrections
Material corrections that affect the meaning or factual content of an article are recorded here. Minor typographical or style fixes are normally left to the Git history.
- Robodebt: advice handoff, planned review count and evidence scope corrected
Qualified the Christmas handoff explanation as a possibility, restored the competing inference and the established January 2015 communication. Distinguished the planned 63,000 initiations from an achieved count, attributed the Collins conversation without an unsupported non-verification assertion, and separated the earlier stopped external-advice process from the later email. Limited training testimony to one officer and retained the Commission’s scope caveat. Added its finding on the instruction not to finalise/deliver the PwC report, identified DSS as receiving the Clayton Utz draft, preserved the oral-information qualification and expanded source references. Aligned the PwC message-selling concern across languages.
Read the corrected article - Madoff: examiner identity, office name, testimony and source pages corrected
Corrected William Ostrow’s name and the historical Northeast Regional Office designation. Named the Deady email participants, distinguished the earlier Donaldson shortlist claim, paraphrased a source transcription typo and retained examiners’ lack-of-recollection qualification. Clarified DTC contact versus verification and limited the bank-record claim to the 2005–2006 investigation. Expanded references for staff skepticism, trading checks and the OIG credibility finding, corrected evidence labels and distinguished routine examinations from substantive complaint-driven opportunities.
Read the corrected article - Celsius: full PDF length, purchase scope and liquidity denominator corrected
Distinguished the 470 printed report pages and 476-page main document from the complete 689-page PDF with 31 appendices. Restored the three-to-four-month scope of the CEL-purchase message and removed the unsupported extra-CEL limitation. Added p.361 for May zero-value messages. Used the detailed liquidity table’s 49.5% to 33.3% coverage of coin liabilities, excluding CEL and custody, instead of the inconsistent summary’s asset-denominator wording. Clarified the one-user offer and June9–12 withdrawal examples, added the English source pin, and aligned Japanese bonus qualification and translated wording.
Read the corrected article - Nidec: audit-sharing exceptions, grant-audit scope and profit target corrected
Qualified the special-audit secrecy account with later information sharing, distinguished the committee’s inference about technical support and clarified the supplemental agreement. Plan B concerned government-grant audit procedures, and the report does not identify the quoted email wording as its opening. Specified the fiscal 2024 second-half record operating-profit target. Added PwC Japan’s response on interview-record changes and the committee’s investigation limits, clarified that the 337 interviewees included other relevant people, and added the committee’s assessment of Nagamori’s responsibility and supporting pages.
Read the corrected article - FTX: listing preparations, borrow settings and key-management scope corrected
Identified FTX Group as considering the possible listing, distinguished the recovery of deposit checks from their earlier accumulation, and preserved the most-retail-customer qualification. Clarified that $65 billion was a database setting rather than actual borrowing and distinguished the withdrawal and liquidation privileges. Identified the $600 million key as an Alameda example, retained the plural keys for over $100 million in Ethereum assets and the petition-date valuation, and corrected missing-owner wording to missing information about who might know more. Removed the unsupported exclusion between the 56 and 35 entities, and clarified the Japanese valuation memo and $50 million account as recorded wording. The headline retains the approximate 80,000 count; Japanese translations were also corrected.
Read the corrected article - Columbia: imagery-request scope, damage models and source pages corrected
Distinguished foam separation at 81.7 seconds from impact at 81.9 seconds and clarified the separate tile-damage Crater model and RCC algorithm. The 90-minute interval concerns the January 22 morning request for Department of Defense imagery preparations, rather than all imagery efforts. Clarified that the subtitle’s criticism concerned the decision rather than the email itself, and corrected the Japanese account of the phone inquiry. Reclassified documented emails, witness accounts and Board assessments, and expanded references for briefing figures, the screensaver, emails, imagery preparations and meeting minutes. Japanese wording about STS-112 being two missions earlier and schedule margin was also corrected.
Read the corrected article - Boeing 737 MAX: contract conditions, alert-fix chronology and references corrected
Clarified the $1 million-per-MAX condition concerning NG/MAX interchangeability and the separate training-expense provision. The AOA Disagree fix was initially deferred until 2020; this was a decision, not a completed three-year delay. Added the later acceleration and February 2019 software approval. Attributed the training and simulator claims to employee records, specified the TARAM pilot-response assumption and then-expected fix date, clarified Boeing’s explanation about sharing MCAS data, and expanded references for company responses and Pierson’s account.
Read the corrected article - Danske Bank: closure-notice chronology, attribution and source pages corrected
Clarified that the closure notification was effective as of 1 August 2013 with ordinary notice of three months, and that the internal-audit report was dated the same day. Distinguished company assessments in audit, business and strategy documents from the report author’s assessments, clarified the attribution of the later allegation overview, and added p.8 for the warning and abandoned IT migration. Japanese wording concerning tax/customs evasion and the scope of missing information about further investigation was also corrected.
Read the corrected article - Carillion: hospital footnotes, government guarantees and source pages corrected
Distinguished the November 2016 hospital appraisal’s 4.9% margin from the year-end 4.44% margin and £52.5 million revenue difference. The £53 million provision was the July 7 initial proposal, increased by £15 million by July 9. Clarified that the final Government request sought guarantees of up to £160 million, added source pages for the payment arrangement and liquidation chronology, clarified January–February dividend discussions and the 30-day expectation for public-sector contracts, and labeled witness accounts separately. Japanese borrowing, claims and misconduct wording was also corrected.
Read the corrected article - Enron: investor name, Raptor backing, attribution and source pages corrected
Corrected the conflated Southampton investor name to Kristina Mordaunt and identified Glisan’s and Mordaunt’s reported receipts as their own accounts. Distinguished the three Raptors backed by Enron stock or contracts from Raptor III’s rights equivalent to TNPC stock. Attributed the Vinson & Elkins assessment to Committee members Troubh and Winokur, preserved qualifications concerning information withheld from the Board and apparently formal approval sheets, and expanded source pages for amounts, assessments and disclosures.
Read the corrected article - WorldCom: quarter sequence, claimed knowledge, estimates and source pages corrected
Clarified that the Post-it amounts concern 3Q01 and 1Q02; corrected the Japanese description of consecutive quarters. Recast the prepaid-capacity explanation as employees’ statements and made the Committee’s qualification that they knew more than they disclosed explicit. Corrected $249 million in Close the Gap initiatives to an estimate of anticipated bookings, aligned quarter-close timing and witnesses’ inability to recall the additional entry and reserve offset, and attributed the explanation about avoiding auditor questions to Taranto and her direct report. Expanded references for Pierson’s knowledge, revenue growth, EPS rounding, and the disputed motive and Committee assessment of the auditor-facing MonRev.
Read the corrected article - Equifax: fake-site warning and log-retention attribution clarified
Added the report’s context that the researcher-created fake site displayed a warning when visitors tried to submit personal information. Clarified that “14 days, and 30 days online” was a concern recorded in an internal email after the breach, and that the report does not explain how the two retention periods relate. Also made the attribution of the forensic firm’s account and the Majority Staff’s assessment clearer.
Read the corrected article - Cruise: report scope, pause notification and video references corrected
Clarified that the article uses the 105-page Quinn Emanuel main report within a 195-page PDF including a technical appendix. Recast the later fleet pause as the October 27 notification to NHTSA documented in that report, corrected who requested video replays and the attribution of second-hand DMV accounts, and expanded page references for full-video availability, delivery and forensic limitations.
Read the corrected article - DeNA: printed pages, disclosure date and source qualifications corrected
The numbered body ends at page 276, not 277; the PDF offset is +30 rather than +29. Printed references for all 11 notes were checked again. Public disclosure was March 13, rather than the March 11 receipt date. Committee accounts of operating practices are distinguished from manual and chat records. Note 10 adds the responses of outside respondents who said they had written for WELQ in footnote 202. Note 11 adds the Committee assessment on pp.246–247 and its qualification that the passage about spirits was only a small part of the article.
Read the corrected article - TSE: company accounts, switchover tests and source pages clarified
We distinguish the companies’ accounts, supplied to the Committee, from the Committee’s assessments (pp.4–5). Note 04 attributes receipt of the revised manual to the report. Note 05 separates pre-launch failure simulation from the assessment of testing arrowhead settings before shipment and cites the continuation on p.24. Notes 07–08 expand the source references; note 08 clarifies that roughly 38% refers to past trading-value share, rather than the number of participants.
Read the corrected article - KYB: delivery account, awareness qualification and inspection scope clarified
Note 01 identifies delivery concerns as interview accounts, rather than an established inability to meet deadlines (pp.36–37). Note 03 attributes Excel sharing to interview accounts, and note 06 adds the committee’s finding that BA knew of rewriting earlier (p.48; p.58, note 53). Note 08 limits the unestablished awareness of ON as a misconduct record to TB and UB (p.62). Note 10 limits the selection of better-performing units to witnessed inspections of seismic isolation dampers. Note 12 identifies March 2015 as the Toyo Rubber announcement date, rather than the date of KYB’s review. Source references for notes 02, 03, 06 and 08 were expanded, and note 11 retains the source’s at-least qualification for the testing assignment.
Read the corrected article - Mitsubishi Electric: performance qualification, test scope and testimony clarified
Note 04 adds the report’s assessment that rated cooling capacity could be met under permitted test conditions and its qualification that the test should have been repeated (p.202). Note 05 identifies the department head’s stop order as an account from former staff (p.201). Note 06 replaces the exclusive customer-audit wording with the report’s account of some models (p.195). Note 08 adds p.198 for the contract and jig explanations and attributes the account of omitted inspections in 1985 to a former employee.
Read the corrected article - Leopalace21: wall scope, performance-test pages and reported review clarified
Note 02 now limits the headline to the attic party wall rather than the whole wall between dwellings (p.114). Note 05 corrects pp.88–89 to pp.86–88 and adds the specimen-specification account and the footnote about separate sound tests meeting D-40 in 2000. Notes 01 and 10 distinguish the Committee’s assessment from testimony; the 1,087-report result is attributed to the reported Audit & Supervisory Board review (pp.61, 109–110). Note 07 restores until about 15 years earlier rather than about 15 years earlier, and other supporting page ranges were extended.
Read the corrected article - SOMPO: warning recipient, plant scope and objection qualification clarified
Note 03 identifies the property-damage supervisor who received the secondee’s December 2020 information and adds that further sharing of the same information was not confirmed (p.27). Note 05 specifies the 24 plants concerned, rather than all Bigmotor plants, and clarifies that the restart decision was made at the meeting beginning at 11 a.m. (pp.41–42). Note 07 separates the documented regulatory report from the removed general analysis. Note 10 adds the footnote explaining that the claims-service planning head raised the need for further investigation but could not maintain an objection to the final restart decision (pp.53–54).
Read the corrected article - Kobayashi: meeting reconstruction, sequence and references clarified
Note 03 now identifies the account as the Committee’s reconstruction from materials and participant interviews because no recordings or minutes were kept (p.37). Note 06 distinguishes the March 4 TEAM-F proposal from the later general-manager meeting’s agreement (p.47). Note 07 adds p.76 for the discussion-item classification and material-distribution practice, retaining p.77 for discussion times. Note 11 restores the official translation’s qualified conclusion that measures were unlikely to work, rather than would not work (p.87).
Read the corrected article - GM: salvage-yard location, purpose and quoted wording corrected
Note 07 now places the March 28, 2012 visit in Davison, Michigan, rather than Wisconsin, and identifies the original purpose as extracting a body-control module (pp.165–166). Note 05 removes the Darwin extension not supported by the cited passage (p.133). Note 06 replaces the unsupported quotation one inch with the report’s assessment that the investigation had moved not at all (p.161). Note 09 identifies the email as sent from the deposition, removes names not verifiable in the redacted copy, and limits the quoted wording to bombshell (p.199). The introduction now identifies more than 41 million documents as collected, rather than all reviewed (p.14). Notes 09 and 10 use descriptions established by the selected redacted report, and note 10 no longer supplies the approval band absent from its cited passage (p.207). References and evidence classifications were refined, and note 08 adds the footnote about a lawyer later asking that a slide be removed (p.254).
Read the corrected article - Shoko Chukin: PDF total, earlier-review scope and speaker corrected
The total is now 172 physical PDF pages, rather than the 155 numbered body pages. The introduction and note 10 clarify that the earlier no-problem judgment concerned alteration and eligibility, while the matter was handled as an internal-rule violation (pp.83–84). The 109 accounts re-evaluated for eligibility are explicitly the 106 with misconduct plus three with unresolved doubts. Account totals count loan cases, not unique customers (p.41). In note 08, the same employee used both art and perfect crime, rather than two different employees (p.71). Note 12 now says stamped, rather than signed or sealed, matching the original description of the replacement sheets (pp.96–97).
Read the corrected article - Suruga Bank: PDF links, reporting qualification and loan wording corrected
PDF links opened one physical page before the cited printed page; the offset is now +8, so printed p.85 opens physical PDF page 93. Note 07 restores the meaning of the quoted survey response about trying even at the cost of one’s life. Note 08 now describes a housing loan conditional on completed renovation, rather than a home-improvement loan. Note 09 attributes the 42 negotiations with the screening department to Aso himself (p.191). Note 10 adds that the loan-management department shared the information with Vice President Okano, although it was not reported to formal governing meetings (p.192). Supporting pages and survey denominators were also clarified.
Read the corrected article - Kansai Electric: return gifts, appendix reference and translation corrected
Note 05 now distinguishes received items from paintings, kitchen knives, a magic mirror, a necklace, a Baccarat vase and ceramic jars listed in the return or return-gift columns. Note 02 also includes representatives of companies as possible people handing over the paper bags. The inventory reference identifies physical PDF page 233 of Appendix 4-1-2-2 rather than a printed p.233. Note 08 preserves the narrowing of the annual briefing to Yoshida Kaihatsu from the 2010s, and note 09 restores the Committee’s distinction between an emergency response and the later inquiry. Note 11 adds p.170 for the warning date, and note 12 adds p.88 for Toyomatsu’s receipts and translates 40回以上 as at least 40, rather than more than 40. Note 07 explains Sensei as an honorific for Moriyama rather than translating it as Teacher, and attributes the frequency comparison to the internal email.
Read the corrected article - Olympus: PDF total, transaction scope and supporting pages corrected
The total is now 243 physical pages for the official English PDF, including exhibits; its main text has 185 printed pages. Note 02 adds p.139 for the finding about other committee members’ approval. Note 04 separates participant testimony on p.138 from the Committee’s assessment on p.125. Note 06 corrects the proposed third-party transfer to the Share Subscription Agreement and identifies $530–590 million as the attached valuations rather than a demanded price (p.65). Other supporting ranges were extended, and the formal auditor handover’s dismissal discussion is distinguished from prior informal contact.
Read the corrected article - Japan Post Insurance: speaker, role and qualifications corrected
Note 05 distinguishes the instruction given to new employees from what the interviewee said they were told (p.97). Note 08 now identifies a section chief at a regional branch rather than a branch manager (p.100), and note 09 identifies the same witness for the late working hours and morning-assembly account (p.105). Note 11 restores the witness’s conjectural wording about a sense that the workaround was allowed (p.110), and note 12 labels staff comments as testimony. The introduction clarifies that specified-case investigations were unfinished when the report was submitted (p.2).
Read the corrected article - Mizuho: notice timeline, customer reports and drill scope corrected
Note 05 now distinguishes the upload restart for the 1:15 p.m. first notice from the 3:58 p.m. later-return notice (pp.62–63). Note 07 labels customer complaints as testimony and removes an unsupported reference to compensation requests, and note 10 specifies that the holiday drills omitted for five years concerned BCP 736 (pp.83–84). Source pages were added to the background discussion, and the timing of branch actions was clarified. Because the publisher disallows embedding, source links now open the cited PDF page directly in a new tab.
Read the corrected article - Archegos: supporting pages, qualifications and attribution clarified
Note 03 now includes the pages for the earlier instructions (pp.83, 85). Note 04 preserves the client-agreement condition and cites p.146. Note 07 identifies six-times leverage as the Committee’s understanding rather than an unqualified fact, and note 12 retains the executives’ recollection. Note 11 adds p.136 for the report’s qualification that the renewal did not affect the ultimate outcome. Other references and the approximate $2.4 billion total were clarified.
Read the corrected article - Toshiba: note alignment, transaction conditions and adjustment period corrected
The introduction now states that the JPY 151.8 billion adjustment runs through the third quarter of FY2014. Note 08 concerns supplying parts at a Masking Price, rather than a subsidiary having no need for parts. Note 10 now matches the Japanese article’s Visual Products C/O case: the CFO from June 2011 to June 2014 subsequently chaired the Audit Committee (p.222). Source references and the description of the external-auditor review’s scope were also corrected. Because the publisher blocks embedded PDFs, source links now open the cited PDF page directly in a new tab.
Read the corrected article - Wells Fargo: printed-page references and assessment wording corrected
Notes 01–04, 06, 08 and 10–12 now cite the supporting printed pages in the SEC EDGAR version, including p.38 for the 192 deleted phone numbers and p.106 for the assessment of the Board presentation. Note 03 clarifies the funding-rate definition, note 09 labels the Committee’s assessment, and note 10 now reflects the report’s qualified wording that Stumpf does not appear to have initiated a further investigation in 2013 or 2014.
Read the corrected article - JPMorgan: total report page count corrected
The total was corrected from 300 to 307 physical PDF pages. The numbered report ends on printed p.301, and printed p.1 is physical PDF page 7. The introduction now distinguishes the two counts; note references and the existing PDF page mapping are unchanged.
Read the corrected article - Toyota Industries: source pages, chronology and scope corrected
All eight note references were corrected or extended to include their supporting passages in the official English edition. Late 2020 dates the EPA application, followed by the inquiry (p.5). Notes 01, 02 and 06 now use the official managerial titles; note 04 distinguishes employee testimony about legal awareness. Note 07 limits the detailed adjustment procedure to the 1GD and 2GD engines (pp.170–172).
Read the corrected article - Hino: committee inference, translation and attribution corrected
Note 01 now identifies the two-to-three-percent uplift as the committee’s inference and cites pp.111–112. Note 02 also cites p.152 for context. Note 03 now reflects the committee’s assessment of ignoring a troubled department to avoid being affected, replacing the previous wording about exposing the problem owner. Note 04 attributes the explanation about speaking up to a survey response (pp.243–244).
Read the corrected article - Sekisui House: clarification of the attorney’s explanation
Note 06 now specifies that Attorney G1 said X had to go to the hospital, as recorded on p.51 of the official English report. The previous wording combined this with the group’s explanation that X was unwell. Note 05 also now labels and cites the Committee’s later assessment on p.67.
Read the corrected article - Daihatsu: evidence basis and attribution clarified
Note 04 is now labeled as a committee finding and testimony, with the report’s qualification that no directly supporting test data were found (pp.36–37). Note 06 distinguishes a survey response about existing resources from the Committee’s assessment. Page references for notes 01, 07 and 08 were also corrected.
Read the corrected article - CBA: original PDF page links corrected
PDF links opened one page before the intended printed page. Printed p.45 is physical PDF page 46; the mapping has been corrected throughout the article. The numerical claims are unchanged.
Read the corrected article