Corrections and Updates Policy

For committee-facing use, pair this research with Lobito Corridor Finance and Risk Map and DRC Border Clearance and Logistics Readiness Review before turning source analysis into a decision memo.

OHUASI corrects material factual errors, updates source-sensitive pages when evidence changes, and labels meaningful revisions so readers can understand what changed and why.

The standard is built for research areas where public information can change quickly: privatization programs, public offers, exchange notices, corridor finance, guarantees, regulatory rules and strategic asset transfers.

Direct answer

OHUASI corrects material factual errors, updates source-sensitive pages when evidence changes, and should label meaningful revisions so readers can understand what changed and why. Corrections are not cosmetic. They protect the reliability of research on Angola privatization, BODIVA markets, SADC corridor finance, offshore holding structures, and strategic asset governance.

Why OHUASI needs a correction standard

OHUASI covers topics where public information can evolve quickly. A privatization perimeter can be updated. A public offer can move from proposed to approved. A regulator can publish a notice. An exchange can update market statistics. A multilateral lender can approve, delay, or restructure support. A concession document can clarify obligations that were previously uncertain.

Readers may use OHUASI pages to understand risk, terminology, public-source status, transaction mechanics, and research priorities. Because of that, a stale or inaccurate page can mislead even if the original article was reasonable at publication time.

This policy creates a public standard for correction and update behavior.

Correction versus update

OHUASI distinguishes corrections from updates.

Correction

A correction fixes a factual, attribution, quotation, date, numerical, source, or naming error that was wrong when published or became misleading because the page failed to represent its own evidence accurately.

Examples include:

• Misstating the year of a decree, notice, or report.
• Calling a proposed transaction completed when the source only showed program inclusion.
• Attributing a statement to the wrong institution.
• Using a market statistic with the wrong period, unit, or denominator.
• Naming the wrong asset, issuer, authority, corridor segment, or legal instrument.

Update

An update adds or revises content because new evidence became available after publication.

Examples include:

• A regulator publishes new investor eligibility guidance.
• BODIVA releases updated market data.
• A privatization program changes the expected transaction perimeter.
• A concession receives a new financing, insurance, or environmental disclosure.
• A public offer moves from preparatory commentary to formal prospectus stage.

Clarification

A clarification improves wording where the original page was not strictly wrong but could reasonably be misunderstood.

Examples include:

• Replacing broad language with narrower legal or market terminology.
• Adding a source-status note to distinguish confirmed facts from inference.
• Explaining why a page uses an older source where no newer public source is available.

Materiality standard

Not every edit needs a correction note. OHUASI should use visible correction or update labeling when a change affects reader interpretation.

A change is material when it affects:

• Whether an asset is included in a privatization perimeter.
• Whether a transaction is proposed, approved, active, delayed, completed, or withdrawn.
• Whether a reader could infer investment eligibility, rights, pricing, liquidity, or legal status.
• Whether a source is official, primary, secondary, promotional, or analytical.
• Whether a risk conclusion changes meaningfully.
• Whether metadata, snippets, or headings could mislead search users.

Update notes

When a page receives a material update, OHUASI should add an update note near the top or bottom of the page. The note should be concise and factual.

A strong update note answers four questions:

1. What changed?
2. When was it changed?
3. What source or source class triggered the change?
4. Does the change alter the conclusion or only add context?

Example update note format

Update note: This page was updated on 7 June 2026 to add newly reviewed source evidence on the relevant privatization perimeter. The update clarifies source status and does not state that a sale has been completed.

Correction notes

When OHUASI corrects a material factual error, the correction note should identify the corrected point without repeating unnecessary detail that creates confusion.

Example correction note format

Correction note: An earlier version of this page described the asset as transaction-ready. The source only confirmed program inclusion. The page has been corrected to distinguish program inclusion from transaction launch.

Retractions

A retraction is appropriate when a page’s central claim is unsupported, materially wrong, or no longer capable of correction through ordinary editing.

Retraction may be necessary when:

• The page relies on a document that proves to be inauthentic.
• The central claim is contradicted by higher-quality evidence.
• The page creates a serious risk of false official-status, securities, legal, or investment-advice implication.
• The page cannot be repaired without rewriting most of the analysis.

A retracted page should not quietly disappear if it has already been indexed or circulated. The preferred approach is to replace the content with a retraction notice, explain the reason at a high level, and preserve any necessary reader-protection context.

Source hierarchy in corrections

Corrections should follow OHUASI’s source hierarchy. A higher-quality source can override a lower-quality source. A lower-quality source should not override a higher-quality source unless it identifies a specific issue requiring further review.

Stronger evidence classes

Stronger correction evidence includes:

• Statutes, decrees, regulations, official gazettes, and regulator notices.
• Securities exchange publications and issuer filings.
• Prospectuses, offering memoranda, concession agreements, and transaction notices.
• Court records and official agency documents.
• Multilateral institution reports and project documents.

Weaker evidence classes

Weaker correction evidence includes:

• Unattributed claims.
• Social media posts.
• Promotional materials without supporting documents.
• Market rumor.
• Commentary that cites no primary evidence.
• AI-generated text.

Weaker evidence can still trigger review, but it should not automatically change a page’s conclusion.

Future-dated and fast-changing content

Some OHUASI pages cover future events, expected transaction windows, planned listings, proposed reforms, or pending infrastructure milestones. These pages require extra care because future-dated claims can become stale quickly.

A page should avoid pretending that a forecast has become a fact. If a page discusses expected timing, it should identify the source and keep verbs precise: expected, proposed, planned, targeted, announced, approved, launched, completed, postponed, or withdrawn.

Metadata corrections

Corrections apply to metadata as well as body copy. A page can mislead users through its title tag, meta description, excerpt, social preview, schema description, or featured-snippet answer even if the body copy is more careful.

When a material correction is made, OHUASI should review:

• Meta title.
• Meta description.
• Open Graph title and description.
• Excerpt.
• Snippet answer.
• H1 and H2 headings.
• Schema summary fields.
• Internal anchor text pointing to the page.

How readers can request a correction

Readers can submit correction requests through the Submit a Correction page. A useful request should include:

• The page URL.
• The specific claim that may be wrong or outdated.
• The proposed correction.
• The source supporting the correction.
• Any urgency or materiality concern.

OHUASI may not accept every requested change. Requests based on source evidence receive priority over requests based on preference, reputation management, promotional positioning, or disagreement with analytical framing.

Response expectations

OHUASI should triage correction requests by materiality.

High-priority issues include false official-status implication, wrong transaction status, wrong regulatory status, wrong investor eligibility statement, wrong date or source attribution, and any issue that could materially mislead readers.

Lower-priority issues include minor wording preferences, style objections, non-material formatting errors, and requests to remove accurate but unfavorable analysis.

Correction policy summary

OHUASI’s correction standard is simple: when evidence shows that a page is wrong, stale, or materially unclear, the page should be corrected or updated in a way readers can understand. Source quality controls the response. Reader clarity controls the presentation.