What kind of peak is a sneak? An Alp? Take a sneak peek at this Yahoo! Style and you decide:
What can I say? What can anyone say after reading this on Yahoo! Style?
Published on February 12, two days before Valentine’s Day, this little article can’t get anything right, even though it was written by Yahoo Style “Editors.” They don’t know it’s not Valentine’s Day; they can’t even spell Valentine’s Day. As if that’s not bad enough, they recommend some outfits (in red, the traditional color for the holiday) for readers who choose to ignore the day. Is it possible that the team of “editors” has confused former and latter? Yup.
In the pantheon of horrible mismatches, this incorrect subject-verb combo on Yahoo! Screen tops the list:
Eek! That’s what a comic strip character says when she sees a mouse. I guess that could be called “eeking out.” I’m assuming the writer for Yahoo! Screen meant “eke out,” though this could be a typo for “seek out”:
Get your free flavors right here! These complimentary flavors pair well with each other. Heck, they go so well to get you might even call them complementary. Unless you write for Yahoo! Screen:
Is it too late to suggest that the Yahoo! Screen writer take a class in basic English?
What’s in a name? If it’s on Yahoo!, probably a mistake or two.
Here are just a few of the mangled names that appeared on Yahoo! recently. How many could you spell correctly. Better yet, how many names would you Google — even if you thought you knew how to spell them?
From Yahoo! Shine a sad attempt at Liza Minnelli:
and Terri Seymour:
and Jon Hamm:
From Yahoo! Screen, a common misspelling of Hilary Swank:
From the experts in all things music at Yahoo! Music, we get the misspelled Reba McEntire:
Yahoo! News folks should know how to spell the name of a first lady. It’s Jacqueline Kennedy:
It’s actually not a lot of typos, although many people would say that one typo on a page is too many. Here’s my current favorite from Yahoo! Screen:
I just love the typos that you know a spell-checker would catch, because I can’t imagine a reason not to use one.
This one, also on Screen, would pass any spell-check, but a competent proofreader or editor would spot it: