Corrections

How to report an error

Use the contact form and give the page and what is wrong on it. A URL and a sentence is enough. You do not need to be right, and you do not need to have a source: a reader saying “this contradicts the page next to it” has caught something real often enough to be worth acting on.

What is most useful

Three kinds of report, in descending order of how much they help.

• A citable public record that closes a gap. The methodology page names every place the source falls silent. The biggest of those is that nothing before 1908 is covered, because the Royal Canadian Mint publishes no specification or mintage for the years when Canadian coins were struck in England. An official mint return, a government report or a digitised annual report would change that. A catalogue would not, because reproducing a copyrighted catalogue is exactly what this site refuses to do.
• A figure here that disagrees with the Mint. Everything on this site is supposed to be traceable to the Mint’s published tables. If a number here does not match what the Mint publishes, that is a parsing error on our side and it needs fixing immediately, because the same bug is probably on several hundred pages.
• A sentence that reads as more certain than the evidence. Harder to spot and just as damaging. If a page states something as settled that is actually inferred, it should be rewritten.

What we cannot act on is a request to add catalogue values, grades or estimated retail prices. That decision is explained at length and it is not a matter of effort.

What happens next

The report is checked against the Mint’s published pages. If the site is wrong, the data build or the wording is fixed and the change is logged below with the date, the page and what changed. If the site is right, you get an explanation of why, with the source.

Where an error came from the parser rather than from a sentence, the fix includes a new assertion in the build’s ground-truth checks, so the same class of error cannot come back silently. That is how the one bug found before launch was handled. The methodology page describes it.

Correction log

No corrections yet. This site launched with the dataset retrieved on 2026-09-04 and nothing has been reported against it.

That is a statement about the site’s age rather than about its accuracy, and it should not be read as the second thing. A site with several hundred data-driven pages and no corrections after a year would be a site whose readers had stopped checking.

Known limitations

These are not errors and they will not appear in the log. They are the boundaries of what the source supports, and they are listed here so nobody has to discover them by finding a page that does not exist.

• Nothing before 1908, because the Mint publishes nothing before 1908. Why.
• No 50 per cent silver period for the 10-cent coin, because the Mint’s table for that denomination does not carry one, even though its 25-cent table does. Why that matters.
• No mint mark information for coins struck before 2006. What the Mint does document.
• No collector or catalogue values, at all, ever. Why.
• Coverage of some denominations ends earlier than the current year, because that is where the Mint’s published table ends rather than because the coin stopped being struck.