Our Official website is embarrassing

[Ayrshire Blue]

More terrible grammar

Quote from the OS

"And that will see ex-Charlton defender Osei Sankofa introduced into the back four for the first time in League One this season.

He confirmed: "Osei will be getting an opportunity this Saturday and properly for the next three games."

 

[stevie_G_G_G]

We are "The Guardian" of websites!

 

[MK Shrimper]

Yeah, Scriven OUT!

 

[seany t]

More terrible grammar

Quote from the OS

"And that will see ex-Charlton defender Osei Sankofa introduced into the back four for the first time in League One this season.

He confirmed: "Osei will be getting an opportunity this Saturday and properly for the next three games."

Is that the sites fault though or the contributor? Where do you edit, and where do you rewrite? Fine line...

But if you mean "Most footballers are illiterate", then yeah... they are.

 

[Southend_Lady]

There have been many arguments about spelling errors on the OS on the board in the past and I must admit most of the time I am not one for moaning about things like this. Being a secretary where I have to spell check documents a lot I always notice errors such as this in papers, magazines and websites etc so perhaps have a bit of an eye for it. However, some of the errors on the OS are so obvious that almost anyone reading it will notice.

Sometimes I skim read articles on the OS and notice the most simple spelling or gramitical error. Once a piece is written to go on the OS, is it not proofed by at least one other person?

Don't get me wrong, I know we are all only human and make mistakes from time to time but I don't think there is any reason why silly spelling mistakes are appearing on the site. It is a little embarrasing, and let's face it, if anyone pulled something like this off the Colchester site, we would be ripping them.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

<gramitical error.<

Pot calling the kettl black? :-)

 

[palexander]

There have been many arguments about spelling errors on the OS on the board in the past and I must admit most of the time I am not one for moaning about things like this. Being a secretary where I have to spell check documents a lot I always notice errors such as this in papers, magazines and websites etc so perhaps have a bit of an eye for it. However, some of the errors on the OS are so obvious that almost anyone reading it will notice.

Sometimes I skim read articles on the OS and notice the most simple spelling or gramitical error. Once a piece is written to go on the OS, is it not proofed by at least one other person?

Don't get me wrong, I know we are all only human and make mistakes from time to time but I don't think there is any reason why silly spelling mistakes are appearing on the site. It is a little embarrasing, and let's face it, if anyone pulled something like this off the Colchester site, we would be ripping them.

Worst thing they could do is run it through a spell-checker?! Takes 2 seconds...

 

[SARF]

'It is a little embarrasing, and let's face it, if anyone pulled something like this off the Colchester site, we would be ripping them.'...
.
.
Ripping them?

 

[Rayleigh boy]

anyone preparing copy for publication knows that you require a sub-editor or at least a second set of eyes to prevent typos and spelling mistakes -

a decent sub editor would cost the same amount as a first contract for a unproven professional footballer/youth player

I vote for keeping the mistakes ....

 

[Southend_Lady]

anyone preparing copy for publication knows that you require a sub-editor or at least a second set of eyes to prevent typos and spelling mistakes -

a decent sub editor would cost the same amount as a first contract for a unproven professional footballer/youth player

I vote for keeping the mistakes ....

I'll read through them for £20 a piece.

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

Yeah, Scriven OUT!

I agree with that.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

anyone preparing copy for publication knows that you require a sub-editor or at least a second set of eyes to prevent typos and spelling mistakes -

a decent sub editor would cost the same amount as a first contract for a unproven professional footballer/youth player

I vote for keeping the mistakes ....

Get the YTS kids to do it. The experience will help them if they don't make it. I'm sure there must be at least one literate one out there. That Swedish kid properly speaks English probably.

 

[philtalkin]

More terrible grammar

Quote from the OS

"And that will see ex-Charlton defender Osei Sankofa introduced into the back four for the first time in League One this season.

He confirmed: "Osei will be getting an opportunity this Saturday and properly for the next three games."

It's got nothing to do with grammar, just a typo......

However, in the first paragraph, I would have put:

And that will see the ex-Charlton defender, Osei Sankofa, introduced into the back four for the first time in League One this season.

However, what do I know?

 

[Stats]

Get the YTS kids to do it. The experience will help them if they don't make it. I'm sure there must be at least one literate one out there. That Swedish kid properly speaks English probably.

Have we got any Scholars originating from Hungry?

 

[Perth Bambi]

It's got nothing to do with grammar, just a typo......

However, in the first paragraph, I would have put:

And that will see the ex-Charlton defender, Osei Sankofa, introduced into the back four for the first time in League One this season.

However, what do I know?

I wouldn't but then my grammar isn't great.

 

[philtalkin]

I wouldn't but then my grammar isn't great.

My grammar died a few years ago! (The old ones are the best)!

 

[Joolz]

It's got nothing to do with grammar, just a typo......

It's not a typo either.

 

[Gremlin]

Worst thing they could do is run it through a spell-checker?! Takes 2 seconds...

A spell-checker wouldn't have prevented today's problem though.

 

[philtalkin]

It's not a typo either.

Come again?

 

[philtalkin]

A spell-checker wouldn't have prevented today's problem though.

True, just a simple mistake!