SuttaCentral
AN 3.20.6.2 “It’s when from time to time a mendicant goes up to those mendicants who are very learned—knowledgeable in the scriptures, who have memorized the teachings, the texts on monastic training, and the outlines—and asks them questions …”
Should be translated without use of the word “texts” which implies written documents. E.g., “… who have memorized the teachings, the monastic training, …” (Bhante Bodhi’s translation does not use the term).
Also I had this on its own separate thread but I think it got overlooked so I’m reposting it in this thread:
At: AN 6.49.3.3
Sumana’s claim copies Khema’s in the translation but the Pāli is different. Khema’s should probably read:
‘There is nobody better than me, nor equal to me, nor worse than me.’
‘natthi me seyyoti vā natthi me sadisoti vā natthi me hīnoti vā’
As I read it, Khema’s and Sumana’s claims essentially amount to the same but they are expressed differently. 
DN24:1.12.3 has now become
he displayed annoyance, hate, and bitterness, hate, and bitterness.
That’s perhaps a bit much of negative emotion.
DN25:13.17:
But what does agree with them they eat without being tied, infatuated, attached, seeing to the drawbacks, and understanding the escape.
Should be: “seeing the drawbacks”, without the “to”, which was apparently left from “blind to the drawbacks”.
SN12.24:21.8: After the insertion of “inceptions”, one root has remained.
The same in SN12.32:9.7.
Thanks for all these edits, they have been many! As after any earthquake, also after an edits earthquake some aftershocks are to be expected. That’s what these “after-findings” are. 
And a few other cases, too. I have fixed them now.
The more I look at it, the odder it seems. Arrrgh.
I know it can be confusing, but in Buddhism we regularly use the word “text” to refer to oral texts.
There just isn’t the vocabulary, since English pretty much assumes that anything substantial is written.
It’s used here deliberately to disambiguate the use of the word “vinaya”, which Bhikkhu Bodhi usually does not. Most of the time, vinaya used in the Suttas does not mean the Vinayapitaka. It means “training”, “practice”, etc. i.e. the practical component of the path. So I try to ensure that in those cases where it does mean the Vinaya texts, this is clear.
Indeed, thanks.
Lol, yes.
Thanks.
Great, I think I have them all now.
Live footage of Sujato without Sabbamitta’s help:
I hope it’s not as bad, Bhante. Without you I’d definitely not do what I am currently doing. 
This morning I have been on the lookout for a show. When searching for a kettledrum I find it in 7 suttas: AN 4.114, AN 5.139, AN 5.140, AN 6.60, DN 2, DN 10,and MN 125.
However, there are also kettle-drums around: in DN 1, DN, 2, and DN 31.
So DN 2 seems to have even both sorts.
Some people in DN 17
DN17:1.6.13 Ye kho panānanda, tena samayena kusāvatiyā rājadhāniyā dhuttā ahesuṁ soṇḍā pipāsā, te tāsaṁ tālapantīnaṁ vāteritānaṁ saddena paricāresuṁ.
And any addicts, libertines, or drunkards in Kusāvatī at that time were entertained by that sound.
seem to be not the same in DN 31
DN31:12.2 Ye dhuttā, ye soṇḍā, ye pipāsā, ye nekatikā, ye vañcanikā, ye sāhasikā. Tyāssa mittā honti te sahāyā.
You become friends and companions with those who are scoundrels, drunkards, addicts, frauds, swindlers, and thugs.
Maybe I am too picky here, as there may be a certain overlap between the terms.
In AN 4.23 the term mahanta vītasārada is translated “the great one, rid of naivety”. In DN 32 it is “great of heart and rid of naivety”.
Remove hyphen throughout.
Use “addict, carouser, drunkard” throughout. (These kinds of phrases are hard to get right, as we usually use very colloquial expressions in English which would not sound right.)
Use “great of heart” throughout.
In DN 32:3.6, the Buddha Vessabhū has lost one “s” and has become Vesabhū.
The passage in AN 7.66:13.11
‘jātiyā jarāya maraṇena sokehi paridevehi dukkhehi domanassehi upāyāsehi, aparimutto dukkhasmā’ti vadāmi.
rebirth, old age, and death. He was not exempt from sorrow, lamentation, pain, dejection, and despair, I say.
is elsewhere translated
Sakko hi, bhikkhave, devānamindo aparimutto jātiyā jarāya maraṇena sokehi paridevehi dukkhehi domanassehi upāyāsehi, aparimutto dukkhasmāti vadāmi.
Because Sakka, lord of gods, is not exempt from rebirth, old age, and death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, and distress. He is not exempt from suffering, I say.
AN 3.38:3.3
This passage occurs both in SN 47.6 and SN 47.7, but is translated differently each time:
SN47.6:3.2: Agocare, bhikkhave, carataṁ paravisaye lacchati māro otāraṁ, lacchati māro ārammaṇaṁ.
If you roam out of your own territory into the domain of others, Māra will find a vulnerability and get hold of you.
SN47.7:3.2: Agocare, bhikkhave, carataṁ paravisaye lacchati māro otāraṁ, lacchati māro ārammaṇaṁ.
If you roam out of your own territory into the domain of others, Māra will catch you and get hold of you.
The same difference again in segment 4.2 in both suttas.
This passage
Atha kho bhagavā tuṇhībhūtaṁ bhikkhusaṅghaṁ anuviloketvā bhikkhū āmantesi:
with the variant version
Atha kho bhagavā tuṇhībhūtaṁ tuṇhībhūtaṁ bhikkhusaṅghaṁ anuviloketvā bhikkhū āmantesi:
is translated
Then the Buddha looked around the Saṅgha of monks, who were (so very) silent. He addressed them:
Why has bhikkhu here been translated with “monks”, and not with “mendicants”?
I believe that in SN 47.43 the closing single quote mark does not belong at the end of segment 1.5, but at the end of segment 2.6.
Oh, and in that same Suttta, Brahma Sahampati does not kneel down on his right knee, but just raises his joined palms towards the Buddha:
Atha kho, bhikkhave, brahmā sahampati ekaṁsaṁ uttarāsaṅgaṁ karitvā yenāhaṁ tenañjaliṁ paṇāmetvā maṁ etadavoca:
In SN 47.46 in segment 3.2 there is no “internally” in the Pali.
SN47.46:3.2: Idha tvaṁ, bhikkhu, kāye kāyānupassī viharāhi ātāpī sampajāno satimā, vineyya loke abhijjhādomanassaṁ;
Meditate observing an aspect of the body internally—keen, aware, and mindful, rid of desire and aversion for the world.
The same again in SN 47.47:2.2.
In SN45.8 Analysis
“And what is right action? Avoiding killing living creatures, stealing, and sexual activity. This is called right action”.
Should not this be misconduct?
Typos in SN56.11. I think it should be “aspects” instead of “respects”
“But when my true knowledge and vision about these four noble truths was fully purified in these three perspectives and twelve respects, I announced my supreme perfect awakening in this world with its gods, Māras, and Brahmās, this population with its ascetics and brahmins, its gods and humans.”
@hmong.buddhism Please note I moved your post to this thread, so that it doesn’t get overlooked when Bhante Sujato does his reviews.
Many Thanks 
Thig2.3:0.3:
3. Sumaṅgalamātātherīgāthā
2.3. Sumaṅgala’s Mother
Should probably be “Sumaṅgalā’s Mother”, with a long “a”.
That’s probably wrong what I said here.
In MN 89 the town is initially spelt Medeḷumpa but later Medaḷumpa.
AN 46:2.2, nested quotes:
‘They say, ‘We practice absorption meditation! We practice absorption meditation!’ And they meditate and concentrate and contemplate and ruminate.
The second quote should be a double quote:
‘They say, “We practice absorption meditation! We practice absorption meditation!” And they meditate and concentrate and contemplate and ruminate.
A friend has asked me to post some potential typos they have found.
Using the Pali-English dictionary function in DN 19, I looked up nhātaka , followed the link to nahātaka, and got not only the English explanation but also the Spanish explanation:
Concise Pali English Dictionary
nahātaka m. (lit.: el que ha tomado un baño) Brahmin que ha finalizado los estudios.
Not a real problem, but quite peculiar.
The sītavana near Rājagaha is translated “Cool Grove” in SN 10.8 and “Cool Wood” in AN 6.55. It’s cool in any case! 
Error - pond in
SN 1.1:
“Good sir, how did you cross the pond?”“kathaṁ nu tvaṁ, mārisa, oghamatarī”ti?
1.5“Neither standing nor swimming, sir, I crossed the flood.”“Appatiṭṭhaṁ khvāhaṁ, āvuso, anāyūhaṁ oghamatarin”ti.