Here’s one major gaffe from Yahoo! Style, followed by a complete headscratcher:
Why do Yahoo! writers and editors have so much trouble with forming the possessive of a plural noun? It’s simple: coworkers is the plural; coworkers‘ is the possessive.
It took a team Yahoo! Style staffers to come up with this ridiculously wrong possessive of the plural noun models:
Apparently there was some disagreement in this brain trust as to where the apostrophe goes — before or after the S. So that put it before and after an S. (Just in case someone on the Style staff is reading this, here’s the scoop: the possessive of models is models’.)
Do you ever get confused about forming the possessive of a plural noun? Where does that apostrophe go? Before or after the S? If you find yourself in a quandary over possessives, just do what the writer for Yahoo! Celebrity did: Put in an extra S so that you can place that apostrophe before and after an S:
Writers’ mistakes like this happen all the time on Yahoo!.
Hang on! I gotta check something on Yahoo! Style:
Did I really read that? Does the writer really think that is the correct plural of hanger-on (notice the hyphen?) The plural is hangers-on, and it’s similar to plural of other hyphenated nouns: mothers-in-law, editors-in-chief, runners-up, and presidents-elect.
Does the writer for Yahoo! Style think that alumnus is the plural of alumnu, or is she just grammatically challenged?
Alumnus refers to one male graduate, although some writers use it to refer to a graduate regardless of gender. Its plural is alumni, which refers to male graduates or a group of male and female graduates. (A female grad is an alumna; its plural is alumnae.)
If all that is too much for this writer, she should have used alums, graduates, or grads.
The carelessly repeated words in this article from Yahoo! Makers aren’t the worst mistakes a writer can make. They’re just the worst easily avoidable mistakes.
Any writer who proofreads her work would have spotted those. The mistake that really chaps my hide is the use of aircrafts as a plural. The plural of aircraft is aircraft. If the writer wanted to emphasize that multiple planes are involved, then she should have used that word.
Did the writer for Yahoo! Makers draw a blank when trying to write about that thing in a bureau that slides in and out and that is used for storage?
It’s called a drawer. If you’re from Boston, like me, you may pronounce it draw, but you spell it with that -ER at the end. But that’s the least of this writer’s problems. She just doesn’t know how to form the plural of a noun, insisting on including an apostrophe:
She makes a common, everyday mistake with this spelling:
It wouldn’t surprise me if she spelled it that way every day, ’cause here it is again:
If the first one is a typo, then the second one is a misspelling. But I’ll concede that this is a typo that even a spell-checker wouldn’t spot (but a competent editor would):
Here’s a creative spelling of bathroom and a mysterious sparklingly where sparkling would do:
How many more mistakes can one writer make in one article? At least one more, although this may constitute two:
I’m not sure what that’s supposed to mean. I wish Yahoo had writers who could write and editors who could edit; it makes life way easier for readers.