Whose mistake is that?

There are writers at Yahoo! Celebrity whose mistakes are obvious to even the most casual reader. The writer who’s made this goof is one of them:

whos apos cel

The possessive form of who is whose; who’s is a contraction of who is or who has.

That’s altogether different

Let’s say this all together: That’s altogether wrong, Yahoo! Sports!

all together spor

If you mean “utterly, completely, entirely,” use altogether. If you’re referring to a group doing something as a unit, use all together.

Gender identify confusion

It seems that the Yahoo! Parenting writer has a little confusion about the gender of a woman’s betrothed:

fiancee par

A fiancée (with two E’s) is a female. This stay-at-home mother is engaged to a man; he is her fiancé.

Juuuuust a bit outside

I was merely trying to lure in lovers of the Charlie Sheen movie “Major League” with one of my favorite quotes. Anyone familiar with “Major League” lore knows that one.  Anyone familiar with English knows that the Yahoo! Sports writer doesn’t know his lure from his lore:

lure spo

Here’s some advice

Here’s a little advice for the Yahoo! News writer: Try using a dictionary.

council news

A council is an assembly of people. As a noun counsel refers to a lawyer or lawyers. And lest you think that the writer had a momentary brain hiccup, here it is again:

council news 2

I intend to follow the advice of a dictionary — not this writer’s example.

Are they opposed to diversity?

Something…something…something… followed by a claim that somebody is “upping the diversity anti,” by which they mean, increasing the opposition to diversity. I think. One can never be sure what a writer means when reading Yahoo! Style:

upping anti sty

It’s also possible that the writer doesn’t know that there is an idiom “upping the ante,” and it means raising the stakes. It’s derived from poker, where the ante is amount that each player must throw into the pot before the cards are dealt.

Take that away!

This phrase is a common one (especially on Yahoo!), but it’s wrong:

anchors away diy

The correct phrase is “anchors aweigh” or “anchor’s aweigh.” According to Wikipedia:

The phrase “anchor’s aweigh” is a report that the anchor is clear of the sea bottom and, therefore, the ship is officially underway.

Actual knowledge not required

What does it take to be an assistant editor for Yahoo! Style? Do you have to know about style? I don’t think so. Do you have to know English. Not really. Here’s why I say that:

checkered heals sty

The writer (who is an assistant editor) has no idea what a checkered pattern is. She has confused it with a plaid, which is what Ms. Dello Russo was wearing:

checkered sty

As for her “patent leather heals”? I have no idea what was healed by patent leather. Perhaps the writer, who may be still learning her craft (as well as her subject matter) meant heels.

Taking the reigns and hoards of people

Well, it looks like it’s an epidemic of homophonic errors over at Yahoo! Style. In a single article, the “news editor” took the reins, writing this gaffe:

taking the reigns sty

and followed up with the hoards of people:

hoards of people sty

People are not hoards, but they may be hoarders. Large groups of people are hordes.

Where mistakes reign

Those wacky Yahoo! Style staffers are at it again. This time they demonstrate that mistakes reign when writing about a 75-year-old (it requires two hyphens):

handing reigns sty

Maybe next time they’ll hand the reins over to someone who understands English.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,081 other followers

%d bloggers like this: