There's also at least one outright correction that only seems to exist on the Internet Archive now: https://web.archive.org/web/20200428214306/https://www.bbc.c... "Correction 25 April 2020: An earlier version of this article incorrectly said that France had conducted just under 140,000 tests a day by 21 April. The figure of just under 140,000 refers instead to the number of tests it had carried out weekly."
("Journalist" is in quotes because, while that was her job title, she specialized in abuse, libel, smears, and calls to murder, and I'm glad she lost the libel case)
I do like this a lot for high profile accounts. It seems fair that if you're verified and have a very large number of followers, you are operating at a privileged level of impact and should lose your right to delete tweets any tweets.
I have a side-hobby of setting up scrapers which pull scraped data into a git repository, precisely for this kind of thing. I'd be happy to set a few up.
Some of my posts about this technique (which I call "git scraping"): https://simonwillison.net/tags/gitscraping/
(1) US coronavirus data in general,
(2) examples of sources that do not log prior days data, or
(3) source that “edit” prior data without noting the edits.
(4) something else
If (1) this page in the table under the column “sources” links to where the data came from:
I've also been running bash scripts every day to save an archive of some of those pages https://github.com/jeromegv/covid_data