I wouldn’t rate their article as “terriable” but their rating system may very well deserve that honour.
This work, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 Australia License.
Tags: spelling
4 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link
http://www.nointrigue.com/blog/2008/09/02/terriable-spelling/trackback/
Tuesday, 2 September 2008 at 6:54 pm
Daniel
Copy-proofing standards at the smh have been dropping and dropping — even in headlines on the front page.
Saturday, 6 September 2008 at 11:25 pm
Enoch Lau
I haven’t been reading the actual paper, just the online version… I wonder if the copyediting has gone down on its print version as well.
Saturday, 20 September 2008 at 5:51 am
Jeff
You will be happy to know this has now been fixed.
The rating function was made by web developers not editors. Obviously a lot of developers lack the copy proofing standards that writers and editors adhere to .
Saturday, 20 September 2008 at 8:00 pm
Enoch Lau
Thank you for your comment, and I’m glad to hear that you care about continually improving your systems.