It’s not a huge mistake, but it’s worth mentioning: The Yahoo! Tech writer should swap the location of that colon and quotation mark:
In the U.S., only two punctuation marks always go after a closing quotation mark: the colon and the semicolon.
When asked why they put quotation marks around a character’s name and why they thought “details are mum” made sense, the editors at yahoo.com are mum:
If the name of the movie Mr. Affleck will direct is “Batman,” then it deserves quotation marks. But it’s not. That’s the name of the character that will be central to a movie. Character names don’t get special treatment. You wouldn’t write about “Romeo” and “Juliet” would you? (Well, if you’re a Yahoo! editor you might, but the rest of the English-speaking world wouldn’t.) And why tell us that “details are mum”? Because aren’t details always silent? Perhaps it was the producer who is mum and details are missing or nonexistent.
Can anyone explain to me why Yahoo! Style writers don’t know how to form the possessive of a common noun? Why would anyone think models’s could possibly be correct?
Maybe the writer didn’t know if she was writing about one model (and the possessive model’s) or more than one (and the possessive models’). So she covered both possibilities with models’s.
But how do you explain her ignorance of using single quotation marks within a quote? Maybe she played hooky the day that was taught in seventh grade.
So, if she was writing about two or more models, she should have written: the models’ “‘bones’ weren’t visible…
Sometimes I think the editors at yahoo.com are just stuck on stupid. They keep repeating the same mistakes. A few days ago, they couldn’t agree on how to refer to a Mexican drug lord. And today, they’re faced with the same issue. Is his name simply El Chapo?
Or is it Chapo and does it require quotation marks?
I’m thinkin’ that maybe the editors don’t know that they’re in disagreement because even they don’t read yahoo.com.
Displaying once again that the people who write for yahoo.com have no means to communicate with each other, someone decides that a drug lord’s nickname needs to be in quotation marks:
while a colleague decides the punctuation is unnecessary:
It doesn’t matter which one the writers and editors chose. They should just pick one style and go with it. But first, they need to establish a way to communicate their decision. I hear there are communication methods like telephone, email, instant messenger, and tin cans connected by a string. One of those might work.
In all the excitement surrounding Christmas, the folks at yahoo.com forgot to consult each other about the Elf on the Shelf phenomenon. Does it require quotation marks, as if it weren’t the real name of the mischievous doll?
Certainly not! You wouldn’t put air quotes around Barbie or Ken, would you? That might be the thinking that the editor who wrote this went through:
Couldn’t those folks talk to each other and figure out how this Internet giant would write about the subject? Nah. That would require that they care about the quality of writing on their site.
Has Yahoo! broken up into separate companies already? I think maybe it has. Maybe the company has also broken up the responsibilities for yahoo.com, meting out duties to different companies in different countries.
Here’s my first clue: Someone somewhere thinks that dark Web needs quotation marks and a capital W:
And on the same page, someone somewhere thought that it’s dark web, without the cap W and the quotation marks:
But wait! There’s more! Also on the page, someone somewhere decided that it’s dark Web, with the cap W, but without quotation marks:
Pretty bad, huh?
Here’s a use for quotation marks on Yahoo! Makers that indicates in spite of the fact these are ugly holiday sweaters, they are not actually ugly holiday sweaters:
Quotation marks can be used to indicate direct speech, a title, or irony. So what’s their purpose in this headline? I think it’s to indicate that the editor has no idea when to use punctuation.