Please don’t ask the editor for yahoo.com what the difference is between .0001% and just plain ol’ .0001. Someone’s head will explode. If the editor knew the difference, then this link on the Yahoo! front page:
would agree with the article behind it:
This 2-sentence excerpt comprises some common mistakes you’ll see on Yahoo! Movies:
There’s the misuse of comprised of, which should be comprises or consists of or something similar. Then there’s the use of twenty-six, which isn’t a mistake if that’s the house style. But, most style guides recommend using digits for numbers that are 10 or above. What’s not a matter of house style? The use of a semicolon, which should be a comma.
When it comes to language, style and punctuation, it appears that the writer had free rein.
I make up statistics. I feel that numbers, even totally fictitious ones, add weight and credibility to a statement. So, I sure you believe me when I say that ninety-five percent of the readers of Yahoo! front page know that a hyphen is missing here:
Numbers consisting of two parts (like twenty-one through twenty-nine) need a hyphen. It’s the law.
This isn’t the worst that can happen when a company (or even a pair of writers) can’t agree on a style issue; it’s just one more example in a truckload of inconsistencies on the Yahoo! front page:
Most style guides recommend spelling out numbers below 10 (some say below 11). But what happens when the style guide isn’t followed? This happens:
Hal Ashby directed great movies, including “Being There,” “Shampoo,” and “Harold and Maude.” He passed away in 1988, so perhaps the younger generation is unfamiliar with his work. Maybe that’s why the writer for Yahoo! Movies referred to him as an actor — and not just any actor, but “one of the leading actors” of the ’70s:
If by “actor” the writer meant “one who does something, like, oh, say, maybe directs,” then that’s a somewhat accurate description.
Punctuation continues to perplex the writers and editors who work on the Yahoo! front page. They just can’t figure out when to use a hyphen. Like here, where they omitted two of those pesky characters in what should be “19-year-old”:
Omitting the hyphens in an age is one of the top three hyphenation mistakes made by Yahoo! staffers. And while I’m on the subject, another frequent hyphenation abomination from Yahoo! is the inclusion of a hyphen after an adverb ending in LY:
At least one person at Yahoo! News doesn’t understand that numbers consisting of two words (like forty-eight), require a hyphen
I’m not responsible for the teeny weeny type or its pale color in these excerpts. I think that it’s a way to discourage you from actually reading the article on Yahoo! Shine. I wish I had taken the hint, because what I discovered was not pretty.
I could never in four score and seven years understand omitting a comma (or two) in “red, white, and blue.” Just like I will never understand why the writer thinks twitter is a common noun. I suppose to some tween-age mind twee-ful makes sense. Maybe I don’t get it because I am old.
Sections of the flag code are numbered with real numbers, not spelled-out numbers. And “Eek!” is what a cartoon character says when she sees a mouse. Maybe the writer is trying to eke out a little attention with her creative use of the language:
Again with the dropped commas? Why?
The man’s name is William Moulton Marston, not this:
Wonder Woman carried the Lasso of Truth. I figured that out on my own. But I don’t know what the rest of the sentence is supposed to mean:
Does anyone really confuse Wonder Woman’s costume with a swimsuit? I guess the writer thinks that’s what Wonder Women wears to the beach, and she changes to her real Wonder Woman costume in a cabana. (The other not-so-pretty things in this paragraph are a relatively minor goof of a missing word and a wrong word, which I can only hope is a typo.)
This writer needs to learn something about punctuation. A hyphen is no substitute for a dash. A hyphen joins words; a dash separates them. And random commas don’t help your readers; they just frustrate them. And I really don’t know what to say about triangular fabric that has opportunity.
The rest of the article consists of photos and their captions, which for some reason are actually readable, though the literary quality is not an improvement. We really shouldn’t be subjected to an all-American error on Independence Day:
I’m pretty sure the word video is not part of the video’s title and that the writer published this article before it was ready:
And finally, a gaffe à la Yahoo!:
After reading the very first sentence of the very first paragraph, I should have stopped reading the article on Yahoo! Shine:
But I felt compelled to read on in hopes that by reading the article I’d learn something about a writer who is so careless or ignorant that she’d make a mistake like that.
Maybe the writer was from Mars. Nah. If she were, she’d know how to spell the name of the planet. As an earthling, she should have learned how to write numbers. Most style guides insist that numbers greater than nine (or ten), should be communicated using numerals:
Maybe she really is from another planet. She’s obviously having trouble with numbers again. She doesn’t realize that two is more than one, and that the apostrophe belongs after the S to indicate the plural researchers:
I’m pretty sure that here on Earth, all fire is bacteria-resistant:
That ’80s reference needs an apostrophe to denote missing numerals. Two dudes? OK, she’s definitely from another nonluminous celestial body. The two researchers she’s trying to write about are one man and one woman.
Did I learn anything more about this writer? Nope. She produces really sloppy writer. Does the reason really matter?
Here’s a lesson in proofreading that comes to you from Yahoo! front page. The lesson? Proofread. You might just discover a missing word, like this example:
and this one:
Another lesson: If you adhere to the Associated Press style for ages, use numerals for ages of people, like, oh, say 51-year-old:
If you don’t proofread or follow any standards, you probably work for Yahoo!.
