Here's a fresh example, the one I'm reading right now.
TI's CD74HCT132: https://www.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/cd74hct132.pdf
It's either that I don't know how to read and understand datasheets, or it has not been QA'ed and is a result of some quick copy-pasting.
That's what I wrote about TI being nuts about keeping datasheets up to their "standards". They clearly have certain internal rules about various sections and tables which must be included in all datasheets so that almost everything you might want to know about the part can be found there. Those things are highly repetitive within product families or even whole types of products (e.g. almost every CMOS opamp has the same pattern of ESD diodes) so certain texts or diagrams are written once and reproduced in countless datasheets.
...with a varying proofreading effort, as you found

For example, if you ever wondered why everybody specifies NE5534/5532 as good for ±3V but TI's recommendation is ±15V, the answer is that TI also used to advertise ±3V on the front page, but in the '90s somebody added a copy-pasted "recommended operating conditions" table with the generic ±15V, and then somebody noticed the conflict and removed the front page spec. I think the same happened to some other parts too, but I don't remember specific examples now.
BTW, input and output ranges may get uncomfortably restricted at low supply, and maybe other performance characteristics not as good as at 30V. But we are talking parts which used to be advertised (also by TI) as at least "usable" at low voltage...