Here’s a roundup

Here’s a roundup of what you can find in a single sentence on Yahoo! Style: A misspelling of roundup, a noun (round up, two words, is a phrasal verb) and a mistake that shines brighter than diamonds:

round up then style

Wrecking havoc with the language

Yahoo! just launched a new site called Yahoo! Style. I immediately thought that it must be better written than the rest of Yahoo!; after all, it was new! Wouldn’t the Internet giant invest in the quality of the writing of a new site? Wouldn’t Yahoo! finally hire competent editors to ensure the success of Style? I was hopeful as I jumped at the opportunity to read an article by Style’s editor in chef. Now there’s a person who must appreciate the need for quality writing.

The title promised info on dressing for extreme temperatures, so I’m thinking the heat of summer and the cold of the dead of winter:

how to dress style

By the time I’d finished the article, I’d learned about dressing for heat and for that other temperature extreme — rain. But I shouldn’t have been surprised that the writer (the editor in chief!) couldn’t figure out what he was supposed to be writing about. The more I read the more I realized he probably couldn’t figure out what language he was supposed to be writing in.

Here he takes a serious subject like global warming and reveals its true threat to humanity: It wrecks havoc on fashion:

wrecked havoc style

Well, wrecking havoc sounds good to me; that would be destroying chaos. It’d be much worse if it were wreaking (or bringing about) havoc.

Then, I read this use of then instead of than:

then seersucker style

I’m going to try to ignore the advice, which doesn’t exactly seem like it’s meant for the woman of the twenty-first century, and focus on the writing, which kinda sucks:

wearing is wearing style

When I read this, I thought wearing cotton over silk sounded odd for dressing for hot weather:

allows to breath style

But the writer (the editor in chief!) meant “prefer cotton over silk.” The rest of the stream-of-consciousness writing alleges that cottons allows [sic] the body to breath. Believe me, if your body ain’t breathing, wearing cotton isn’t going to help. The writer meant that cotton is preferable because cotton breaths (that is, it allows air to pass through it).

So, am I hopeful that Yahoo! Style will provide quality content? Not if it’s written by Yahoo! writers (and the editor in chief).

Then better than than

Want grammatically correct writing? Then Yahoo! Shine is not for you:

than shine animals

And then I wrote ‘then’

Question: What’s better than this description on Yahoo! Shine?

then shine

Answer: This would be better than it is if the writer had used than instead of then. Then, it would have been correct.

Writer was more worried about appearance than grammar

Yahoo! has changed the appearance of its front page, but its content hasn’t gotten any better. It’s still loaded with grammatical errors, typos, misspellings, and wrong words:

fp then being

It seems that the writer was more worried about appearances than choosing the correct word.

Worse than normal

This is no worse than normal errors you’ll find on Yahoo!. This time it’s from Yahoo! Screen:

then normal

Completely grossed out

If the writer for Yahoo! TV’s “Daytime in No Time” thinks this is correct, then I am officially completely grossed out by her:

than dint

A new record?

Is this a new record for Yahoo! Shine? One sentence, three goofs: than instead of then, a missing the, and break instead of brake.

Chances are your chances are awfully good

If you think that this is correct, then chances are you work for Yahoo! Shine:

Loose cannon

If you can’t stand homophonic errors, then you shouldn’t be reading Yahoo! Shine. Especially this:

This writer is a loose cannon, who can screw up something as simple as a book title. (Huck Finn is a character; the book is “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn.”)

I assume that the “cannon” she refers to is Christopher Cannon, the author of “The Grounds of English Literature.” But that makes no sense. This loose cannon doesn’t know the difference between a large weapon that fires large balls and a group of literary works (that would be a canon).

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 802 other followers

%d bloggers like this: