Corrections log

Why this page exists

The easiest thing a content site can do is edit silently: notice a mistake, quietly change it, act as though it never happened. It costs nothing technically, and it leaves the reader with no way to judge how reliable the site is — you cannot tell how often it has been wrong, or whether it corrects itself at all.

So corrections go here in public. Entries stay; nothing gets deleted from this list.

What counts as a correction

Logged: factual errors (a number, mechanism or process described wrongly), wording that could mislead, technical faults affecting whether a page works, and substantive changes to this site's own policies.

Not logged: typos, punctuation, layout tweaks, and ordinary expansion of existing content — that is a normal update, not a correction.

What the English edition inherited

The English pages went live on 2026-08-29, so their own history starts short — the entries below are all from the days around launch. They did not, however, start from a blank slate: they were written against the Chinese edition's text after its corrections had been applied, so the fixes logged there are already reflected here. That includes the ones that changed what the advice actually says rather than how it reads — dropping an unweighted risk "score" that had no data behind it, removing a suggestion to open a second account to recover a missed referral code, deleting a timing heuristic for diagnosing why verification failed, and rewriting the passage on withdrawal size and frequency that had contradicted itself.

Two site-wide changes also apply to these pages directly, because both editions share the same stylesheet and footer: since 2026-08-25 the heading font loads from this site instead of from Google Fonts, so opening a page no longer sends your details to Google for it; and the footer disclosure line was rewritten to stop making a promise about your costs that we have no authority to make.

The full history is on the Chinese corrections log. It is in Chinese, and we would rather point you at the real record than paraphrase it into something that looks like an English original.

Log

1. 2026-10-07 · Every page · Google Analytics 4 switched back on, privacy notice rewritten to matchFrom this date every page loads Google Analytics 4 (GA4) again, to measure page views and traffic sources. Page URLs, browser and device information are sent to Google, and analytics cookies may be set. We do not intentionally send names, email addresses, exchange account details or tool form inputs; tool inputs are still processed locally in your browser. You can restrict cookies in your browser or block analytics scripts. There are no user accounts or advertisements. The privacy notice was rewritten the same day to say so; for how Google handles the data, see the Google Privacy Policy. The 2026-09-27 entry below records the removal at that time; the state it describes lasted until 2026-10-07.
2. 2026-09-27 · Every page · Google Analytics removed, so the privacy notice is true againFrom 2026-09-17 every page on this site carried the Google Analytics tracking code, while the privacy notice kept saying “no Google Analytics”, “no tracking cookies” and “one third party, Cloudflare”. For those ten days the notice did not match what the pages actually did, and it was not updated first as it promises. The tracking code was then removed from every page, so the notice was accurate again without changing a word of it (that lasted until 2026-10-07, when the code was switched back on — see the entry above). This is a factual mismatch that affects readers, so it gets its own entry.
3. 2026-09-07 · Privacy notice (all three editions) · “Your browser makes requests to this site’s own domain only” was not trueThe privacy page said that opening any page here produced requests to wickvo.com and nothing else, invited you to confirm that in your browser’s network panel, and summarised the page as “no analytics”. None of those three held. Cloudflare, which this site sits behind, inserts a line into every page on the way out that loads its own traffic-counting script from static.cloudflareinsights.com — so the network panel has always shown two domains, not one. That line is not in our page files, but the traffic-counting script is a switch in Cloudflare’s dashboard, we should have known it was on, and we should have looked at the network panel ourselves before writing that sentence. This one particularly did not belong on a privacy page: it was not a vague marketing claim but an invitation to check something that did not check out. Changed to: that section is now “Third-party resources: one of them” and names the domain, says who inserts it, says what it counts, and reports that by Cloudflare’s own account it sets no cookie and does not follow you across sites — noting plainly that we have no way to verify that layer independently. The heading “The one place data does get produced” went too, for the same reason. Page description, social card text and structured-data description were corrected in all three editions. What did not change: the traffic count stays on — it is the only visitor data this site has, and writing it down openly beats switching it off; no ads, no tracking cookies, no accounts, and tool input still never leaves your browser. The privacy page promises that a change like this gets logged rather than made quietly, which is why this entry exists.
4. 2026-09-03 · Home page / How Binance fees are calculated / Sign-up guide / Fee comparison tool · The “up to 20% off trading fees” figure has been removedThe invite box on the home page said signing up with this site’s code got you “up to 20% off trading fees”, and the Chinese edition said the same. On checking, that number has no source on any current Binance public page. As of September 2026 their referral campaign page has two tabs: the invited person is offered fee-rebate vouchers with conditions attached (buy more than 50 dollars of crypto, then complete more than 100 dollars of spot or convert trading), while the large percentage on the other tab is what the referrer earns, not the person signing up. So this layer is not a percentage at all right now, and “up to 20%” was both unsourced and stated a conditional offer as an unconditional one. What it says now: the home page says you get whatever fee rebate Binance is currently running for new users, with the amount and conditions set on their page on the day; the fee article carries the current wording, the conditions and a September 2026 screenshot of the campaign page, which is now cited as a source; the sign-up guide matches; and the 20% default in the fee comparison tool is labelled as a placeholder with a note that 0 is a valid entry. Unchanged: the invite code itself, and where the referral links sit. This is a factual error that shaped reader expectations, so it is logged on its own.
5. 2026-09-03 · Home page / Disclosure / About / Footer · A sign-up link was added under the invite code, taking this edition from two referral placements to threeUntil now the Chinese and English home pages printed the invite code but gave no link with it, so anyone who wanted to act on it had to open the sign-up guide first and find the link there. That extra step saved nobody any money; it only buried a commercial relationship we already disclose in plain text. The home page now carries one link directly under the invite code. The link text says where it goes, and the fine print under it says it is a referral link and that copying the code and typing it in yourself works exactly the same. What did not change: it is not a pop-up, an overlay, or a bar that follows you down the page; the pages about liquidation, frozen bank cards and yield-product risk still carry no referral link at all; the Vietnamese edition still carries none, for the reason in the 1 September 2026 entry. The disclosure page, the about page and the footer have been updated from “two pages” to “three places”, six across the site rather than four. This is a substantive change to site policy, so it is logged here.
6. 2026-09-02 · Vietnamese on-ramp, fees and sign-up pages · “Approval in principle” overstated the sources, and the applicant list had no citationIn the earlier correction the same day, we described the five applications as found complete and valid and “granted approval in principle”. On re-checking the public reporting, no source uses that phrase: Vietnam’s Ministry of Finance received seven applications, judged five of them complete and compliant, and sent those on to the Ministry of Public Security and the State Bank for comment, with a check of physical operating conditions still to come before any licence is issued. The earlier wording moved the process one step ahead of where it is, which is not acceptable on a page about the law, so it now reads “complete and valid”. Separately, the names VIXEX, Vietnam Digital Assets JSC, TCEX, CAEX and LPEX were attributed only to “domestic media reports” with no link. The Vietnamese on-ramp page now cites the two original reports — VietNamNet (19 March 2026) and Thanh Niên (18 March 2026) — and states plainly that these are press reports rather than an official Ministry announcement; we could not find an official announcement carrying that list.
7. 2026-09-02 · Vietnamese pages covering the legal framework / Disclosure and About in all editions · Wrong start date for the penalty, and the individual fine misreadThe earlier wording said Decree 284/2026 took effect on 1 September 2026, so from that date an individual trading outside a provider licensed by Vietnam’s Ministry of Finance fell inside its administrative-penalty scope, at 30–50 million VND. Two things were wrong. The trigger date: Resolution 05/2025/NQ-CP, article 7(2), attaches that liability for domestic investors to a point six months after the first crypto-asset service provider is licensed — and as of this correction no provider holds a formal licence, so those six months have not started running. The amount: fine figures written into the decree are the figures for organisations; an individual committing the same act is fined half, which puts an individual at roughly 15–25 million VND, not 30–50 million. We also corrected “five applications already given preliminary approval” to what public reporting actually says: the Ministry received seven applications and found five complete and valid, granting them approval in principle — approval in principle is not a licence. The decision to take referral links and the invite code out of the Vietnamese edition stands; it was a choice made before that clock starts, and only the reasoning has been corrected. This is a factual error touching law and money, so it gets its own entry.
8. 2026-09-01 · Every Vietnamese page / Disclosure / About · Referral links and the invite code taken out of the Vietnamese editionVietnam’s Decree 284/2026 took effect on 1 September 2026 and sets administrative penalties for trading crypto-assets outside an institution licensed by the Ministry of Finance (the exact trigger date for domestic investors is stated correctly in the 2026-09-02 entry above). On that basis the Vietnamese edition's two registration links carrying referral parameters, and its four plain-text printings of the invite code, were all removed. The sign-up guide and the fee article are still there in full — what came out is the sign-up link and invite code, not a line of the step-by-step explanation. The disclosure and about pages in all three editions, plus the footer of every Vietnamese page, previously counted "two per edition, six across the site"; they now read two each in Chinese and English, none in Vietnamese, four across the site. That is a substantive change to how this site makes money, so it gets its own entry.
9. 2026-08-29 · Sign-up guide / Verification keeps failing · A predicted outcome we had no source forBoth pages said that because the Terms of Use limit each user to one account, a second one would get stuck at the same gate, or would not complete verification. The terms support the one-account rule; they do not say what the platform does about a duplicate, and we had no second checkable source for the outcome we were predicting. The body text, the visible FAQ and the FAQ structured data now say the same thing: a duplicate sits outside the terms from the moment it exists, what happens to it is the platform's decision, and official support is the place to ask. Logged separately because it is the kind of claim people act on with money already in an account.
10. 2026-08-29 · Disclosure / About / Homepage footer · "Two pages" was ambiguous across three editionsEach language edition has its own two pages carrying a referral link, six across the site. The disclosure page opened by saying "two pages on this site", which reads as two in total. All three editions now count per edition and say so explicitly.
11. 2026-08-29 · Fees / Cash in & out / Withdrawal networks · Correction notes moved off the articlesThree passages carried their own revision history in the body text — what an earlier version said, and why it was changed. Admitting a change in public is right, but this page is where that record belongs; in the middle of an article it just dilutes the point the paragraph is making. The articles now carry the current answer only, and the changes are recorded here.
12. 2026-08-29 · Site-wide · Search snippets shortenedMost titles and meta descriptions on the English pages were long enough to be cut off in search results, one of them at over 400 characters. They were rewritten to fit, keeping whole sentences rather than trimming to a character count.
13. 2026-08-29 · Site-wide · English edition publishedThe English edition went live with the same structure as the Chinese one: fourteen articles, five browser tools, and the compliance pages. It is not a translation. Where the practical answer depends on region — payment methods, ways to buy crypto with local money, what a blocked payment method actually means — the English pages were written for readers those Chinese pages were not addressing, and they say different things in those places on purpose. Both editions are cross-linked with hreflang, and neither is treated as the source of truth for the other.

How to tell us

If you find something wrong, email us through the contact page. The most useful reports contain three things: which page, which sentence, and what you think the correct version is. A checkable source makes it better.

Confirmed corrections get added to the list above with a date. The full editorial process is on the editorial policy page.