I wouldn't have believed he'd have let even a draft with this many errors out of his hands

I've been reviewing documents this week that are produced by my former employers (although not staff I worked with directly), and I'm kind of appalled. Typos and clunky sentences and unfinished sentences, and I do not get it. Why was this not routed through the technical editor? Why am I the one having to go through and say, "Insert comma on line 26 after 'windows'," and so forth?

WW was taller in JLA New Frontier: [link]

I've been reviewing documents this week that are produced by my former employers (although not staff I worked with directly), and I'm kind of appalled. Typos and clunky sentences and unfinished sentences, and I do not get it. Why was this not routed through the technical editor? Why am I the one having to go through and say, "Insert comma on line 26 after 'windows'," and so forth?

I'm editing an article about a new drug, written by someone with a PharmD, who did not know what "FDA" stood for. (Her guess was Federal Drug Agency.) I am not making that up.

OMG.

This document wasn't spellchecked, obviously. There's a typo approximately once every 7 sentences. Don't get me started on random capitalisation or errant tabs. I know Office upgrades make things tricky, but that's no substitute for indenting.

Technically I'm supposed to be adding to this document, but I envision much of today will be deciphering and cleaning up. And they want the project team to see it tomorrow! Ha.

I'm editing an article about a new drug, written by someone with a PharmD, who did not know what "FDA" stood for. (Her guess was Federal Drug Agency.) I am not making that up.

You know who else thinks it stands for Federal Drug Agency? KIDS IN MIDDLE SCHOOL.

Okay, they seriously want us to update our voicemail outgoing message with the date EVERY DAY? Seriously? This is coming down from the company president, but I can barely remember to fill in my weekly timesheet. That's *so* not happening.

OMG.

Office of Mutilated Grammar?

You know who else thinks it stands for Federal Drug Agency? KIDS IN MIDDLE SCHOOL.

This is a horribly written article. I hate when we get shit like this. If it weren't about a new drug, I'm sure we would have rejected it. In the abstract she says she used one set of search terms in MEDLINE, but in the article itself, she lists a whole other set of search terms she says she used.

Way to go, lady. I really trust your research.

Why was this not routed through the technical editor?

Because the technical editors keep getting laid off due to budget cuts?

t sorry, not closing the bitter tag any time soon