As I've written before, it's The Star's policy not to restate an error in a correction.  For example, let's say a story refers to Jamie Smith, but she really spells her name Jamie Smyth.  The correction should not say:

A story in the Nov. 26 Local section misspelled Jamie Smyth's last name as Smith.

That's a bad idea because it puts the mistake in the paper a second time.  Better simply to write:

A story in the Nov. 26 Local section misspelled Jamie Smyth's last name.

There was an error in yesterday's paper that's a little tougher.  A story about the last time gas was this cheap listed other things going on in the coutry at the time.  Among them, "Marines in Iraq committed a variety of abuses against Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib."

Problem is that Abu Ghraid was an Army prison, and those accused were in the Army, not the Marines.  Big, big difference -- and I understand any Marines who were offended by the mistake.

Right now, I'm leaning toward wording the correction thusly:

An item in the Nov. 25 FYI section should have said that Army soldiers abused Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib.

Does that work?  How could it be worded better?