Book Review: Proof Positive – How to Find Errors Before They Embarrass You

by Noel Atzmiller

Proof Positive – How to Find Errors Before They Embarrass You
By Karen L. Anderson
©1996 by SkillPath Publications. Mission, Kansas (193 pages)

I recently found a job that requires me to perform extensive proofreading/editing of technical documents. Before I started, I wanted to obtain some guidance and tips on how I could perform my tasks well.

I visited a local used bookstore, scanned their shelves, and found a book titled Proof Positive. After glancing at the Table of Contents and reading several random pages, I knew I found just what I needed. Although book was printed in 1996, inside this document was information crafted to encourage and equip a person to become an excellent proofreader.

Now, I know you might wonder if a book that focuses on proofreading is applicable for editors. I think it is. The proofreader helps to make sure the document author follows the rules determined by an editor. By detecting and correcting infractions within an accepted code of language content, the proofreader is working with an editor and enabling the author to produce the best possible document.

The author of this book, Karen Anderson, is a nationally recognized writer, trainer, and communications consultant. As the owner of her own consulting firm, she has taught business professionals techniques for producing polished, quality documents.

Her extensive knowledge is found within the first pages of the document, where she provides practical answers to crucial questions that a proofreader must know, such as:

  • “How can a proofreader prepare to proofread successfully?” p.9
  • “Where will a proofreader find the most errors in documents?” p.19
  • “How can a proofreader do a good job when there is too little time before the deadline?” p. 25

Anderson continues by offering several clever techniques to find errors in a document. She recommends reading text backward, starting with the last word in a paragraph and moving to the beginning, to help find spelling and usage errors. Holding a single-sided copy up to a light with the print facing away from view reveals mistakes with short words and poor formatting. Locating hyphenation and leading issues is possible by rotating a hard copy 90 degrees with the right margin pointing up.

Anderson also provides chapters that explain correct grammar and review punctuation guidelines, but she avoids a stodgy recitation of rules. She offers short exercises that give the reader an opportunity to practice the guidelines she proposes.

Poor verbal habits can also creep into documents. Errors can occur because the proofreader thought a sentence “sounded right” and “looked” correct. Anderson reacts to this by listing corrections to many common mistakes and guidance on avoiding poor word choice, redundant words, wordiness, jargon and cliches.

The copious advice in the document culminates in a chapter that details some tools a proofreader can use to track their documents for error-free publication. Tracking slips, error logs, and a personalized proofreader checklist are just a few of these practical tools.

Five appendixes include information on proofreader marks, commonly misspelled words, misused words, transitions, and type specifications.

The only downside of the book is that it focuses entirely on printed documents; it does not provide guidance for proofreading web-based text. However, many of the tips and guidelines can still be used for non-print documentation.

Throughout the document, Anderson conveys repeated encouragement to the proofreader. This feature and the numerous tips and guidelines make Proof Positive a valuable reference for beginning or experienced proofreaders.

This book is available on Amazon (amazon.com), AbeBooks (abebooks.com), and other online book sellers. Check it out!

Of Interest: Editing for Leaner Modern Content Webinar

As a TechComm editor, you often work with old legacy content that is overly formal, poorly structured, and contains unnecessary information.

Your challenge is to reduce complexity and remove unnecessary content to improve the user experience. But how do you get started?

On 8 September 2022 at 10 AM ET (for
your local time zone, go to https://bit.ly/3KHn0A1), join renowned speaker Leah Guren to learn:

  • Why fluff is so bad
  • Why lean content is a future-proof TechComm skill
  • How to identify common forms of fluff
  • How to edit aggressively
  • How to think creatively to solve structure problems
  • …and more!

To order tickets for this webinar, go to: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/editing-for-leaner-modern-content-tickets-387978854197

Eye for Editing: The Editor as Teacher

Editor’s Note: A version of this article was originally published in the STC Notebook in 2014 as part of a series. To make it easier for you to find these articles again in the future, they are tagged with the Eye for Editing tag, and the titles prefaced with the same phrase.

Author's Note: This is the last article (that currently exists) in this Eye for Editing series. It has been fun to revisit my thoughts from the “first edition” in STC Notebook to find that most, if not all of it, still holds true to the editing experience. 
Do you have an idea for a follow-up article that you’d like to publish in Corrigo? Would you like to put together your answers to my questions for others to read? Submit your ideas and articles to the Corrigo editor at editor@stc-techedit.org.  And you are welcome to contact me any time to keep the conversation going

By Paula Robertson

How do you think of yourself in your editing role? Is each document, article, topic, or book by the same author or team of writers an isolated editing task? Does each task seem to start from scratch as if you’d not edited that author’s work before? Or does each subsequent edit you deliver build on your previous suggestions and comments? Do subsequent documents indicate that the writer “got it the first (or last) time”?

Continue reading “Eye for Editing: The Editor as Teacher”

Eye for Editing: Caught Between Two Edits

Editor’s Note: A version of this article was originally published in the STC Notebook in 2014 as part of a series. Over the course of 2022, we hope to publish more of these articles. To make it easier for you to find these articles again in the future, they will be tagged with the Eye for Editing tag, and the titles prefaced with the same phrase.

By Paula Robertson

Once upon a time, I found myself in an interesting position. I had a freelance client for which I did editing exclusively. I also had a full-time contract gig where my job descriptors were writer, editor, designer, trainer, developer, project manager… My deliverables were primarily original content as a writer, and editorial reviews of the original content of my writer peers, on a team of three.

Continue reading “Eye for Editing: Caught Between Two Edits”

Eye for Editing: Taking It Personally

by Paula Robertson

Editor’s Note: A version of this article was originally published in the STC Notebook in November 2013 as the third in a series. Over the course of 2022, we hope to publish more of these articles. To make it easier for you to find these articles again in the future, they will be tagged with the Eye for Editing tag, and the titles prefaced with the same phrase.

Skipping to what is one of the most important skills to have in editing, this month I want to talk about how we relate to the other person in the form of a review of their work. It may be a writer colleague, an engineer or software developer, your manager, the CEO, or a client. You might not have met the person or even know who they are. But you’re not just editing content. Reviewing someone else’s work can be a rather intimate way of relating to another human being.

Continue reading “Eye for Editing: Taking It Personally”