Corrections

Every number we have published and then had to change is listed below, with the date, what was wrong with it, and how it was caught. Nobody else in the Pakistani solar and EV market publishes this, which is precisely why we do.

7 corrections logged · newest first · last entry 26 July 2026

• 26 July 2026Correction

  Yadea G5 electric scooter — price

  What we published

  Rs 350,000 for the Yadea G5, carried from our own catalogue-planning notes.

  What was wrong

  The Rs 350,000 figure does not belong to the G5 at all. It belongs to a different Yadea model, the Epoc-H, and was mismapped onto the G5 when our catalogue notes were compiled. It was a mapping error, not a stale price.

  What it is now

  Rs 280,000 (verified 26 July 2026).

  How it was caught

  Re-verification during the e-bike batch. Yadea’s own November-2025 price list, PakWheels and Gari.pk independently all show Rs 280,000 for the G5; Rs 350,000–355,000 matches the Epoc-H on Yadea’s own shop page.

  Recorded in content/products/electric-bikes/yadea/fact-check.json

• 26 July 2026Correction

  Risen “Titan” solar panel — cell technology and price

  What we published

  Titan and Hyper-ion described as Risen’s TOPCon lines, with a Pakistani street price of roughly Rs 25,000–25,200 attached to the Titan.

  What was wrong

  Both halves. The Titan is 210mm mono PERC (650–675W); Hyper-ion is n-type HJT heterojunction (700–745W); Risen’s TOPCon modules are a separate series again. And the Rs 25,000–25,200 figure belonged to the 585W n-type TOPCon panel — a different product family — because no Pakistani street price for any Titan 650–675W panel exists that we could find.

  What it is now

  The Titan page states mono PERC 650–675W and carries no price at all, with status “legacy”. The TOPCon prices sit on the TOPCon page where they belong.

  How it was caught

  Risen’s own product pages list HJT and TOPCon as distinct series, and the Titan RSM132-8-650BMDG–670BMDG datasheet is explicitly mono PERC. Our own fact-check file records this as the single largest factual error in that research run. A reseller listing that called the Titan “N-type Bifacial” was the likely origin of the mislabel; we did not repeat it.

  Recorded in content/products/solar-panels/risen/fact-check.json

• 26 July 2026Correction

  ZnShine solar panels — three price rows

  What we published

  Three ZnShine price rows taken from a Pakistani daily price site: Rs 39.50/W (Rs 23,253), Rs 41.75/W (Rs 24,570) and Rs 42.75/W (Rs 26,445).

  What was wrong

  None of those three rows is a ZnShine product. They are Suncore-branded panels printed underneath a section heading that reads “ZNShine Solar Panels Latest Prices Today” — a categorisation error on the source site that we carried through.

  What it is now

  All three rows removed. The mislabelling itself is now published on the ZnShine hub as a buyer warning, because anyone else reading that page will make the same mistake.

  How it was caught

  The page was re-fetched with an explicit request for verbatim brand attribution per row. Every model string under the ZnShine heading begins “Suncore”. An earlier pass had flagged the attribution as uncertain but kept the rows anyway — that is the failure mode this second pass exists to catch.

  Recorded in content/products/solar-panels/znshine/fact-check.json

• 25 July 2026Correction

  Jinko Tiger Neo 585W — per-watt baseline

  What we published

  Rs 44–45.5 per watt, carried from our July-2026 market baseline.

  What was wrong

  The baseline was high by roughly Rs 2 per watt against what dealers were actually quoting.

  What it is now

  Rs 40.65–43.45 per watt at dealer level (verified 25 July 2026).

  How it was caught

  Three independent July-2026 Pakistani price lists converge on Rs 40.65–43.45/W for documented n-type stock. The Rs 44–45.50 figure turned out to be one aggregator’s outer range for the whole of 2026, not a current dealer rate. Several other panel baselines were corrected downward in the same pass.

  Recorded in content/products/solar-panels/jinko/fact-check.json

• 25 July 2026Correction

  Inverex Nitrox 6kW inverter — model and price

  What we published

  A Nitrox 6kW at roughly Rs 260,000, from our catalogue plan.

  What was wrong

  The plain 6kW SKU is superseded. The live residential model is the 6.6kW, and the 6kW no longer has a street price we can verify.

  What it is now

  The 6.6kW is listed at Rs 275,000–280,000 (verified 25 July 2026). The 6kW page ships with no price and explains why.

  How it was caught

  Inverex’s own Nitrox Hybrid series listing runs 3.6kW, 6.6kW, 8kW, 10kW, 13kW, 16kW upward — with no 6kW in it — and a Pakistani retailer showed the 6kW SKU flagged as unavailable.

  Recorded in content/products/inverters/inverex/fact-check.json

• 25 July 2026Correction

  Inverex Nitrox 12kW three-phase inverter — price

  What we published

  Roughly Rs 820,000, the figure still quoted by older Pakistani buying guides.

  What was wrong

  High by roughly 7–10% against what four sources showed on the day of verification.

  What it is now

  Rs 745,000–770,000 (verified 25 July 2026) — the best-corroborated price in our Inverex coverage.

  How it was caught

  Four sources on 25 July 2026: Rs 750,000 in stock at one retailer, Rs 765,000 sold out at a second, Rs 770,000 at a third, and Rs 745,000 on a fourth page dated 24 July 2026. The Rs 800,000 that appears on one of those pages is a struck-through list price, not a street price — which is exactly how the inflated figure spreads.

  Recorded in content/products/inverters/inverex/fact-check.json

• 26 July 2026Correction

  Site-wide — 14 product pages carried fabricated prices in the database

  What we published

  On 14 inverter model pages, the price field held either a quoted range or an explanatory sentence rather than a number.

  What was wrong

  Our own import step stripped every non-digit from those fields instead of rejecting them. A range of “275,000–280,000” silently became 275,000,280,000 — around Rs 275 billion. Worse, a sentence saying a price was not independently verifiable became a number derived from the date in it, putting a fabricated price on two pages that had deliberately shipped without one. The visible page text was correct throughout; the corrupted values were in the database and in the structured data.

  What it is now

  Price fields are bare numbers or absent. Ranges use separate low and high fields. The import step now clears a bad value rather than leaving it in place, and every affected page was re-imported.

  How it was caught

  An internal audit of the first inverter batch’s price fields, run because a second agent did not trust the import path. Published here because it is the failure this site exists to warn readers about — a number that no human ever typed, appearing as if it had been verified.

  Recorded in AGENTS.md · content/products/_CONVENTIONS.md §2

Found something wrong?

Tell us and we will check it, and if you are right this page gets another entry. How to reach the desk is on the about page; the rules we hold ourselves to are in the editorial policy, and the verification ladder itself is on how we verify.