Times Publishes Salinger Obit Without Striking TK Placeholder

Huge news of the death of iconic author and recluse J.D. Salinger swept across the media today, with innumerable news outlets clamoring to publish their obits ASAP after the news broke. In doing so, The New York Times made an embarrassing blunder in what was an otherwise gripping and exhaustive summation of the 91-year-old Salinger's life and times: Editors failed to remove a TK placeholder prior to publishing the obituary on its Web site.

As you can see highlighted in the screen shot above, taken from the article's second page, editors left a TK (a common abbreviation used in publishing to indicate that there is more material "to come") after the quote from Salinger's agent, for which it was apparently holding a place. As you can see below in a screen shot of the exact same graph, Times editors quickly realized the presence of the composition vestige and deleted it from the article--but not before the Proofreader saw it!

Don't forget to scroll down for today's regularly scheduled post.

A.P. Story Screws Up A.P. Style

Midwest correspondent Stan Kost e-mailed the Proofreader earlier this week inquiring about a usage of the abbreviation "vs." in an A.P. article he'd read on The New York Post's Web site. "In paragraph five, is it appropriate to abbreviate 'versus' when quoting someone?" asked Kost in the message. "It looked a bit awkward when I saw that," he added.

It looks awkward because abbreviating the word versus in the body of an article is a deviation from ordinary A.P. Style. For writing purposes, the Proofreader typically adheres to New York Times style and, therefore, doesn't own an A.P. Stylebook. So, the Proofreader consulted journalist Carly Baldwin, a writer for Metro New York newspaper, for enlightening on A.P. Style.

In an e-mail message, Baldwin wrote the Proofreader and noted what an odd favor he was asking of her. Then, she quoted the following directly from her 2003 A.P. Stylebook:

Versus should be spelled out in ordinary style and writing. "The proposal to revamp Medicare, versus cuts to Medicare ...."

In short expressions, however, vs. is permitted: "The issue of guns vs. butter has long been with us."

For court cases, use v. "Marbury v. Madison."

Given that the abbreviation appeared in a 29-word quote, it's probably safe to say that the word should've been spelled out, a minor mistake to be sure, but a mistake nonetheless.

The Proofreader thanks Stan Kost for submitting the mistake and Carly Baldwin.

Post Makes Error In Phils/Yanks Preview

Tonight an epic, three-game series opens at Yankee Stadium: The WFC Philadelphia Phillies are taking on the Bronx Bombers. There's much anticipation about the series and in today's edition of the New York Post, on page 93, exists a small error in the preview of the "weekend showdown," which highlights the pitching match-ups for the series.


As you can see highlighted in the above picture, Post editors screwed up A.J. Burnett's E.R.A. Instead of placing a decimal point between the five and the two, they put a colon, making it look like the time 5:02. No doubt, the E.R.A. is atrocious and not what the Yanks had in mind when they signed Burnett to a contract that pays him $16.5 this year, but that doesn't mean it should be misrepresented in the Post because of an avoidable typo. It should read 5.02.

Hopefully the error is an omen for New York's inferiority to Philadelphia on the baseball field--'cause New York is superior to Philly in almost every other way. This should be a great series and the Proofreader is looking for it to turn into a home run derby for the Phils and all of their power-hitting left-handed batters. Let's go Phils!

Hoboken Government Poor Spellers

At least "Hoboken" is spelled right

The Proofreader’s maiden post points out the above sign, one of at least four like it, on Constitution Court in Hoboken, New Jersey. The signs serve to warn residents of the hazards of pet waste and inform citizens of local law, but their copy is written with poor spelling and sloppy use of a hyphen. As you can see in the highlighted picture above, the sign features a misspelling of “pursuant” in the phrase “persuant to chapter 93” and it sports an unnecessary hyphen in the phrase “clean-up”

The Proofreader consulted various online resources and was unable to find “persuant” as an alternate or accepted spelling of the word pursuant anywhere in the English language. MSN Encarta, The American Heritage Dictionary, Merriam-Webster and Dictionary.com all concur that “p-u-r-s-u-a-n-t” is the correct spelling of pursuant. So, it’s definitely a mistake. Interestingly, on Hoboken’s Web guide outlining city regulations for dogs and other animals, the word is spelled correctly (PDF) at least three times. As for the hyphen in “clean-up,” The New York Times Manual of Style and Usage advises “Do not use hyphens…when the meaning is clear without them.” And in this case, the phrase “clean up” would be perfectly clear; the inclusion of a hyphen is unnecessary.

Moreover, a Google search of “persuant” turned up results pointing to numerous misspellings of the word, mostly by individuals on personal blogs or message boards, which isn’t a very big deal. However, two examples should raise eyebrows. One in which yet another government agency, on the other side of the country, misspelled the word on its Web site…at one time (pictured below). But the department, which boasts a phalanx of attorneys who should know how to spell pursuant, has since corrected the gaffe.

The search also turned up this one, which features a misspelling of the word in a headline, from what appears to be a companion Web site of MoneySense, “Canada’s leading personal finance magazine,” a place that should have Microsoft Word and/or a sufficient supply of professional editors available to catch blunders like this before they go to print or get published online.