Are you waiting for a Yahoo! Style article that is error-free? Don’t hold your breath. Relax, breathe, and read:
I know nothing about fashion. So is it my ignorance of current clothing trends that makes me not see what this writer sees?
She claims that these two women’s jackets matched. But I just don’t see it:
She could be right. If she means that both gals are wearing blue jackets with a zipper and two sleeves, she’s right. As long as we ignore the fact the Ms. Hadid’s jacket has a ruched front, but Ms. Carey’s doesn’t, she right. If we overlook the difference in the width and colors in the bands, she’s right. If we don’t take into account that the jacket on the left has ruching along the zipper and the one on the right has none, and the one on the right has a collar and a long zipper, but the one on the left has neither, she’s right. And if we don’t consider that one is cropped and one isn’t, she’s right. And one has set-in sleeves and the other, raglan sleeves, she’s right. So, it must be me.
I certainly know now to trust this writer and not my lying eyes. It’s my lying eyes that tell me that Ms. Hadid’s zipper isn’t circular, but her zipper pull is:
I’ve got to start reading more fashion sites if I’m going to keep up with fashion. But maybe I won’t start with Yahoo! Style.
What do you call an accessory that goes with everything you have on? A wherewithal!
Ha-ha. That riddle just popped into my teensy brain when I read this on Yaoo! Style:
If this homophonic horror happened in a nineteenth century classroom, the writer would be sitting on a stool in the corner where she would be forced to wear a dunce cap.
Kate Beckinsale is in good graces, but the writer for Yahoo! Style doesn’t tell us with whom:
If you can decipher the rest of the sentence you might conclude that Ms. Beckinsale is actually in good company. The writer of this article isn’t exactly in good graces with readers, but she is in good company at Yahoo!. If not good company, then at least lots of company. Writers at the Internet giant use words incorrectly every day (or everyday, as they would write).
If there’s an editorial equivalent of a bridezilla, I’m probably it. The title would be warranted. But I wouldn’t be. Likewise, criticism of this word choice by a Yahoo! Style writer is warranted:
The bride might be justified, the title might be warranted, her actions might be warranted. But could the bride be warranted? Not so much.
Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee for the presidency, but you wouldn’t know it if you read this on Yahoo! Style:
As a common noun, democratic refers to a democracy or people in general. But if you’re referring to the political party in the U.S., it’s Democratic, with a big D.
Speaking of a big D, that’s the grade I’d give this writer for coming up with Clintons’s. I’d be appalled if I hadn’t seen that error so often on Yahoo!. It seems Yahoo! writers (and their editors, if they have them) don’t know that the plural of Clinton is Clintons and the possessive of Clintons is Clintons‘.