Corrections and updates

Fixed in place, with a date

An error is fixed in the place where it appeared and carries a dated note explaining what was wrong and what it now says. We do not delete the old sentence and pretend it was never there, and we do not move a correction to a separate page where a reader would not see it. The point is that someone who read the earlier version can see that it changed and why.

The note is short and factual. It says what the page said, what it says now, and the date the change was made. We do not attach blame to a reader who pointed it out, and we do not dress a correction up as a refinement when the original was simply wrong.

How a Correction Is Recorded and Dated in the Log

A correction is recorded as a new log entry, not as an edit to an old one. Each entry carries the date it was made, the section it touches, the wording that was wrong, the wording that replaces it, and the source the new wording rests on. The date is the day the entry is published, not the day the mistake was first suspected. Entries are appended in order, so the newest correction sits at the top and the page's history reads backwards in time without gaps.

The corrected text goes live at the same time as its entry, so the page and the log never disagree. If a figure is involved, the entry states the figure we were given and what it now says, so a reader can reconcile the two without hunting through old versions. Where the fix depends on something we cannot put a number on, such as a cost that varies by broker or account type, the entry says what the number depends on instead of inventing a value. Nothing is backdated to look tidier.

Dating also fixes the reader's frame of reference. A page read today may describe conditions that were accurate on an earlier date, and the log is where that earlier date is visible. For a South African reader checking leverage or funding details, the entry date tells them whether the statement predates or follows a change they have heard about elsewhere. The log does not promise the page is current to the minute; it promises that every change since publication is dated and attributable to a specific correction.

When a Source Changes Without Saying So

When a source changes silently, the page is corrected and the log entry records both the old and the new position of the source, with the date we noticed rather than a date we were never given. A silent change is the hardest case, because there is no announcement to cite and no effective date to quote. The entry says plainly that the change was discovered on a given day and that the source did not state when it took effect. That honesty about the gap is more useful to a reader than a tidy entry that implies we knew all along.

The practical consequence is that statements resting on that source are re-checked rather than patched in isolation. If a silent change affects one sentence about leverage, every other sentence that leans on the same source is examined, and any that no longer holds gets its own entry. Where the source now says something we cannot verify independently, the page says what the position depends on instead of restating it as settled. Numbers we were given, such as the 0.10-lot margin figure of about $85.50, are kept exactly as given and are not adjusted to match a source we cannot read.

Readers are told which parts of the page are exposed to a source that has moved quietly. A section built on a regulator's published position is more exposed than a section describing arithmetic, because the arithmetic can be re-derived from the lot size and pip value while a regulatory position can only be read. The log flags the exposed sections so a reader knows where to look first. This is the same reason the regulator caveat is repeated on the page: the entity serving South Africa is a fact a reader must confirm for their own account.

Marking Errors, Updates and Clarifications Differently

Each log entry carries exactly one of three labels, and the label is chosen before the entry is written. An error means the page asserted something false or dropped a qualifier that changed a number's meaning. An update means the page was accurate and has been extended or refreshed. A clarification means the original wording was defensible but a reasonable reader could have taken it the wrong way, so the sentence is tightened without conceding a factual mistake. The three are never merged into a single vague note, because the label is what tells a reader how much of the earlier text to discount.

The label governs how the entry is written. An error entry must state the wrong wording and the right wording side by side. An update entry must state what was added and why it was not there before. A clarification entry must quote the original phrasing and the replacement, so a reader can see that the meaning did not change even though the words did. Where a single change spans two labels, it is split into two entries rather than averaged into one, and the split is itself visible in the log.

Labels also set expectations about follow-up. An error is reviewed to see whether the same mistake appears elsewhere on the page, and any resulting fixes get their own entries. A clarification is checked against the surrounding section to confirm the tightened wording does not now contradict a neighbouring sentence. An update is checked for whether it makes an older statement incomplete, which would then need its own update entry. The labels are not decoration; they route the work that follows.

Why Nothing Is Deleted From the Record

Nothing is deleted because a removed entry destroys the only evidence that the page was ever wrong, and a reader who saw the earlier version is left with no way to reconcile what they remember with what is now published. Deletion also makes the remaining log unreliable, since a reader cannot tell whether a gap means nothing happened or something was taken out. The record is therefore additive: entries are appended, corrections to entries are themselves entered, and no line is rewritten to look better in hindsight.

This applies to entries that were themselves mistaken. If a correction turns out to be wrong, the wrong correction stays visible and a further entry explains why it was wrong and what the position now is. That produces a readable chain rather than a single authoritative statement with no history. For a page covering gold (XAU/USD) mechanics and South African leverage rules, where a small misreading of a cap changes every margin calculation a reader makes, the chain is the point: it shows how the current wording was arrived at and what it replaced.

Deletion is also the one change a reader could never detect. Every other edit leaves a dated trace, but a deleted entry leaves nothing, which is why it is excluded even when the entry is unflattering. The log's value comes from being complete rather than presentable. A reader checking our work should be able to start at the oldest entry and read forward to the current page without finding a step missing, and that guarantee only holds if removal is off the table entirely, including for entries that reflect poorly on how the page was written.

Correction Versus Update: Two Different Records

A correction fixes something the page got wrong; an update adds or refreshes something that was right when written but has since moved on. If a leverage cap was stated as 1:500 for all retail clients and is corrected to up to 1:200 for retail, that is a correction, because the original sentence misdescribed the rule. If the page is extended to explain that eligible or professional clients may see up to 1:500 depending on instrument, that is an update, because nothing previously published was false. The distinction matters because it tells a reader whether to distrust the earlier text or merely to date it.

Updates are logged with the same fields as corrections but labelled differently, and they never overwrite the substance of an earlier entry. A correction implies the page misled someone for a period; an update implies the page was accurate and then became incomplete. Mixing the two would let a real mistake hide inside a routine refresh, which is exactly what the log exists to prevent. Where a change is both, the entry is split so the error is corrected on its own line and the new material is added on another.

Readers should treat the two labels differently. A correction is a signal to re-read the affected section, because what was there before was wrong. An update is a signal that the section has grown, and the earlier text can still be relied on for the period it covered. On a page about gold (XAU/USD) mechanics, margin and the FSCA caveat, that difference is practical: a corrected pip value changes every calculation a reader has made, while an added note about eligible clients changes only who the cap applies to.

A change is not an error

A condition that simply changed since we checked is a re-check, not an error. If a broker alters its leverage cap, its funding routes or the entity that serves South Africa, our earlier sentence was accurate when written and is now out of date. We treat that as a reason to re-read the broker's documents and update the page, not as a mistake to be corrected.

The distinction matters because it tells you how much to trust a page you are reading. Each page carries the date of its last check, and a broker document dated after that is the thing to compare against. Leverage in South Africa is capped at up to 1:200 for retail and up to 1:500 for eligible or professional clients depending on instrument, and if that cap moves, the page moves with it after we have read the new document.

How to report one

Report an error by writing to editor@mzansipaperza.com and telling us the page, the sentence and what you believe it should say. A link to the broker document you are relying on helps more than anything else, because it lets us check the claim against the source rather than against memory. You do not need to be polite about it; you need to be specific.

We will look at the page and the document, and if the error is real it is corrected with a dated note. We will not promise how quickly that happens. If we disagree, we will tell you why and point to the document we used, and that exchange sometimes ends with the page unchanged and the sourcing made clearer.

What Counts as an Error Worth Logging on This Page

An error worth logging is a statement on the page that is wrong against a source we can name, or a number that does not match the figure we were given. A gold pip stated as 0.10 instead of 0.01, a lot size described as 10 oz instead of 100 oz, or a margin example that does not reconcile with 1:200 on a 0.10-lot XAU/USD position at a reference price near 4275.0 all qualify. So does a regulator sentence that drops the FCA and CySEC caveat or misnames the entity serving South Africa.

Typos, awkward phrasing and a sentence a reader would have written differently are not errors. Neither is a figure that is correct but sits in a section you would have placed elsewhere, and neither is a missing topic that was never promised on the page. The test is narrower: does the page assert something false, or omit a qualifier that changes what a number means? A leverage cap written as 1:500 for all retail clients, when the retail figure is up to 1:200, is an error because it changes what a South African reader would expect on their own account.

Anything that could cost a reader money if believed is logged first. That covers instrument mechanics, margin arithmetic, leverage caps, funding methods, and the regulator caveat. A claim that local funding runs through a channel we were not given, or a rand amount presented as a fixed cost when it depends on the broker, is treated as an error rather than a style issue. Errors are logged even when the correction is small, because the point of the log is that a reader can see what changed and judge the page on that record.

How a Reader Can Check a Page's History

A reader checks a page's history by opening the log and reading it against the page, section by section, starting from the most recent entry. Each entry names the section it touches and quotes the wording before and after, so the comparison can be made without relying on memory or on an archived copy. Where an entry cites a source, the source is identified closely enough to be found. The check takes a few minutes and requires no account, no email and no request to us.

The most useful thing to look for is whether the current page text matches the latest entry for each section. If the log says a figure was corrected and the page still shows the old one, the page is out of step and that discrepancy is itself worth reporting. A reader can also count how many entries touch the same sentence: a sentence corrected repeatedly is one to read with more care than a sentence that has never moved. That pattern is visible only because the log is complete and ordered.

For anything involving rand amounts, funding through local cards, bank transfers or e-wallets, or the regulator caveat, the reader should confirm the position with their own broker rather than treating the page as final. The page and its log describe what we were given and when we recorded it; they cannot see the terms on an individual account. The entity serving South Africa is FxPro Markets Direct Costa Rica Latam SRL, and the caveat to check which entity your own account is opened with is the part a reader must verify personally, whatever the log shows.

Why the Correction Log Stays Public

The log stays public because a reader cannot judge a page's reliability without seeing how often and how badly it has been wrong. A page with no visible history asks for trust it has not earned. Publishing the record, including entries that reflect our own mistakes, lets a South African reader weigh the page against what they already know about leverage caps, rand funding and the entity their account sits with. The log is the evidence, not a marketing page, and it is written to be read by someone checking our work rather than by someone browsing.

Public also means unfiltered. Entries are not removed once they become embarrassing, and corrections that were later themselves corrected stay visible with their own follow-up entry. A reader can see a chain of changes to the same sentence and decide whether the current wording is settled or still moving. That is more useful than a clean-looking page with a hidden edit trail, and it keeps the incentive honest: the cost of a careless sentence is a permanent public line explaining it, which is a stronger discipline than an internal note nobody reads.

The log does not collect anything about the reader and does not require an account. It sits alongside the page so the two can be compared line by line. Where an entry refers to a source, the source is described in enough detail that a reader can go and check it, and where a figure depends on the broker or the account type, the entry says so rather than presenting a range as a fixed fact. That is the same standard the page itself is held to, applied to its own history.

Who Decides a Correction, and Within What Time

The decision to log a change sits with the person who maintains the page, and it is made before the edit goes live rather than after. There is no separate approval queue that a reader has to wait on, because a correction that sits unpublished while it is debated leaves the wrong text in front of readers. The test applied is the same one used to decide what counts as an error: can the wrong statement be shown to be wrong against a source we can name? If yes, it is corrected and logged; if the answer depends on preference, it waits.

Timing depends on severity, and severity is judged by what a reader could do with the wrong sentence. Anything touching margin arithmetic, the leverage cap, the pip value of 0.01, the 100 oz lot size, or the regulator caveat is treated as urgent and corrected as soon as the error is confirmed, not batched for a later revision. Wording that is merely loose is grouped and handled in the next pass. No fixed turnaround is promised for the second category, because promising a number we cannot hold to would itself be a claim we could not stand behind.

A reader reporting an error gets no private assurance that it will be fixed; the only assurance is the public entry, which either appears or does not. That is deliberate. A private promise is unverifiable, while a dated line in the log can be checked by anyone. Where a report is rejected, the reason is that the page's statement matches the source we hold, and the reader is told which source that is so they can compare it with their own. Disagreement about a source is resolved by naming sources, not by seniority.