You know your proofreading skills suck if you missed the typo and erroneous punctuation in this headline from Yahoo! Shine:
I’m speculating from this on the Yahoo! front page that the writer has never been engaged:
The coveted celebrity ring is the engagement ring — the one with the big stone. The wedding ring is that narrow band. I think that most people in the U.S. would know the difference. Perhaps the writer resides in a country that doesn’t have the tradition of engagement and wedding rings.
It’s hard not to cringe when you read something as poorly written as this article on Yahoo! Shine. From the typos and the writer’s imaginative spelling of Rutgers, it has a lot to offer the discerning reader:
She writes about an author whose most recent book is “The Essentials of Business Etiquette: How to Greet, Eat, and Tweet…” using who’s (which means “who is” or “who has”) and getting the title wrong:
I’d tell the writer to learn to proofread, or if you don’t have time, get someone to do it for you. It would be helpful to you for your career:
It’s time she learn the difference between a possessive pronoun (like its) and a contraction (like it’s):
If she learned to proofread, she could send an email and post something on a social media site without typos and missing words:
She might also learn to check her articles after they’ve been published to ensure she hasn’t omitted vital information, like the text of a tweet:
Why would Elizabeth Taylor help create a public health crisis? She didn’t, of course. And she was never a “co-foundee amfAR” since “co-foundee” isn’t even a word. But that’s the kind of nonsense you’ll read on Yahoo! Shine:
She was a cofounder of amfAR and helped create public awareness of the AIDS crisis. Her efforts deserve more respect than this embarrassment from Yahoo!.
President Franklin Roosevelt described December 7, when the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, as a “date that will live in infamy.” In the U.S., it is an infamous date; a date with an exceedingly bad reputation; a heinous date; a notorious date. It’s hard to imagine how Pippa Middleton’s dress could be a heinous dress with a notorious, exceedingly bad reputation. But that’s what the brainiacs at yahoo.com allege:
Ms. Middleton’s gown may be well-known. It may be famous. But it is not infamous. Someone needs to spend a little more time with a dictionary.