Was it matched up with feathers?

If something is “paired down,” does that mean it was matched up with feathers? No, it means that the Yahoo! Style writer doesn’t know the difference between pair (which means to join or match in a set or pair) and pare (which means to reduce or trim).

paired down sty

8-year-old becomes youngest man alive

How did an 8-year-old become the youngest man alive? By appearing in a headline on Yahoo! Shine:

8-yr-old man shine

That don’t look right. Somebody made a boo-boo: Either the 8-year-old was a boy or there’s a digit missing in the man’s age.

How can you miss that?

How did the editor for Yahoo! Shine overlook the missing question mark in this headline?

missing quest shine

Where did it go? Here, at the end of an imperative sentence:

guess quest

Do you mean the department store?

Dillard’s is a department store chain in the U.S. Did it go on a honeymoon with Jill Duggar? Maybe the Yahoo! Shine writer responsible for this headline can tell us:

dillards shine

Which what?

Huh? I’m not even going to try to explain this headline from Yahoo! Shine:

which what shine

Agree to disagree

It looks like the writers/editors over at Yahoo! Shine have agreed to disagree. They can’t seem to agree on the spelling of a word here:

mugshot shine

and here:

mug shot shine

For the record, the American Heritage Dictionary declares mug shot (two words) as the correct spelling. Now maybe we can see if the writers can agree on what to call the guy in the mug shot.

This is a sorry excuse for writing

I’m sorry to say it, but it’s hard to believe that this article from Yahoo! Shine was produced by a professional writer. Heck, it’s hard to believe it was written by a middle school graduate.

There are a few minor problems, like needlessly capitalizing a word. “Sorry” doesn’t get a capital letter unless it’s at the start of a sentence or you’re writing about the board game:

sorry 1

This is a sorry attempt at making a possessive out of women:

sorry 2

(To form the possessive of a plural noun not ending in S, just add an apostrophe and S: women’s, men’s, children’s.)

Things get a little sorrier with an error-filled paragraph, which includes a subject-verb mismatch (the subject study takes the verb has identified):

sorry 3

A “verbal tick” sounds like a talking, bloodsucking arachnid. If the writer meant an idiosyncratic and habitual behavior, that would be a tic. Then there’s the issue of the pronoun they, which has no antecedent. Just who is they? The rest of the sentence is just a mess. If you’re still reading that article at this point, I feel sorry for you.

How many fashion shows?

If you believe what you read on Yahoo! Shine, then you’d think that Burberry and designer Tom Ford had a joint fashion show in London:

hats 1

Well, that’s a lie. They didn’t join up in London. The fashion show that the author refers to is strictly a Burberry affair. I have no idea why the writer dragged Mr. Ford into the mix. Just like I have no idea why she dragged a hyphen into this adverb and adjective mix:

hats 2

Or why she dragged an apostrophe into this plural:

hats 3

Perhaps she was confused about the location of the apostrophe (does it go before or after the S?), so she put it before and after the S, even though it doesn’t belong in 1990s:

hats 4

Were the “mall rats” buying droves of hats? It’s kinda hard to picture that since droves means “a large mass of people.”

Arousing suspicion

I suspect that the writers and/or editors over at Yahoo! Shine haven’t been trained in the wonder that is punctuation. If they had been, they’d know enough not to put the question mark here:

paradise quest

The question mark belongs after the closing quotation mark because the entire sentence is a question.

I suspect the writer didn’t look up the spelling of Lil’ Kim; if she had, she’d know there’s an apostrophe missing here:

lil kim shine

So, when the writers aren’t dropping punctuation marks, they’re adding them where they don’t belong, like here:

post-partum shine

The word is postpartum, without a hyphen.

And my favorite mistake, arousing my suspicion that no one at Yahoo! cares about spelling, is this misspelling:

arrousing shine

I’m incredulous

Call me a skeptic, but I’m totally incredulous that an article could appear on Yahoo! Shine containing these “words”:


I can safely say that the first is a typo for what should be response. But incredulation? I have no idea what that’s supposed to be. The Emotionary (which is a website of words that do not exist, but should) defines incredulation as “the surprised excitement when something you were dreading goes incredibly well.” So, even a made-up word doesn’t seem to apply here.

Anybody have any idea what word the writer meant?

%d bloggers like this: