Now you made me wanna go reread my own articles and see what you guys 'fixed' in them
yours was good.
You didn't correct anything there?
Damn it, Courtney, I can't take you seriously, I just keep staring at the boobs in your avatar..
I think the only thing I did was put periods in some places in the BJ bio. Its like you had a capital letter and spacing.. but the period wasn't there.
you were just making sure I was paying attention.
someone said to me the other day, if I didn't have ditas boobs in my ava they'd refuse to believe its me.
I think the only thing I did was put periods in some places in the BJ bio. Its like you had a capital letter and spacing.. but the period wasn't there.
you were just making sure I was paying attention.
someone said to me the other day, if I didn't have ditas boobs in my ava they'd refuse to believe its me.
Yeah, of course, I was just making sure you were paying attention ..
I'm seriously gonna go reread that article now I don't remember missing periods, but there's always a possibility I didn't get enough sleep that day or something I had to insert all those links, so I might have gotten myself confused.
You know, Dita's face would be quite okay. Boobs just..akhem.. distract me.
Em..guys..
I take it the articles were shortened/changed, because some of the words are missing (which pisses me off to no end , but I'm not the boss), but there's one sentence that was altered and it kinda doesn't make sense anymore. ..
The current version on the site:
That was a recording for a local label Fiat Records and was on the way to becoming a worldwide celebrity.
My original text:
That was a recording for a local label Fiat Records and was only a beginning of his way towards worldwide celebrity.
I'm sorry, but the song "Look for Love" never became, nor has ever been on the way to becoming a world celebrity, and obviously that line was referring to Armstrong's celebrity, not the song's.
There are other words missing, and even though I don't think editors should have a right to correct anything but the spelling/grammar mistakes, that's not for me to decide. It seriously messes with my perfectionist mind that the articles have been altered, but that's just something I have to deal with.
I just think that sentense I quoted just got misunderstood or something.
Em..guys..
I take it the articles were shortened/changed, because some of the words are missing (which pisses me off to no end , but I'm not the boss), but there's one sentence that was altered and it kinda doesn't make sense anymore. ..
The current version on the site:
That was a recording for a local label Fiat Records and was on the way to becoming a worldwide celebrity.
My original text:
That was a recording for a local label Fiat Records and was only a beginning of his way towards worldwide celebrity.
I'm sorry, but the song "Look for Love" never became, nor has ever been on the way to becoming a world celebrity, and obviously that line was referring to Armstrong's celebrity, not the song's.
There are other words missing, and even though I don't think editors should have a right to correct anything but the spelling/grammar mistakes, that's not for me to decide. It seriously messes with my perfectionist mind that the articles have been altered, but that's just something I have to deal with.
I just think that sentense I quoted just got misunderstood or something.
"only a beginning of his way towards worldwide celebrity"
Worldwide celebrity doesnt make sense the way you have it. I'm pretty sure when I edited it, I said "his way towards BECOMING a worldwide celebrity"
O_o did someone change it again after that? I might have, I edited those awhile ago. It needs to be "and he.." It makes sense, its pretty obvious they were talking about billie becoming a celebrity, not the song, hence the "HIS" (which should be he in the correted version). His being the pronoun taking the place of Billie. The other places were altered because the sentences were run ons and the comma's were spliced, that IS editing grammar.
"only a beginning of his way towards worldwide celebrity"
Worldwide celebrity doesnt make sense the way you have it. I'm pretty sure when I edited it, I said "his way towards BECOMING a worldwide celebrity"
O_o did someone change it again after that? I might have, I edited those awhile ago. It needs to be "and he.." It makes sense, its pretty obvious they were talking about billie becoming a celebrity, not the song, hence the "HIS" (which should be he in the correted version). His being the pronoun taking the place of Billie. The other places were altered because the sentences were run ons and the comma's were spliced, that IS editing grammar.
Please, do explain how "worldwide celebrity" doesn't make sense in this case. If you didn't know, 'celebrity' is not only a person that is famous, but also a state of being famous, basically a synonym of fame. (Dictionary definition of "celebrity"). So, now unless you explain to me how that makes no sense to anyone but you, I don't see why my text should be at all altered. I don't mean to be rude, I realize that you don't have to know everything, but maybe you'll look things up next time before messing with someone's text.
I have no problem with commas.
Don't really know though how in the sentense "As a child, Armstrong was often singing in hospitals, which gave him great experience as well as broadened his musical outlook since he had to sing songs from musicals and other types of songs he would have never performed otherwise", the words in italics are grammatically incorrect enough to be deleted.
Banach95 King For A Couple Of Days Age: 52 Gender: Female Posts: 4870
January 11th, 2007 at 12:02am
Not to get into the middle of you two but I also edited a few... I only changed the actual sentence itself when it didn't sound right.
I would read each article and when a sentence didn't look right I would read that one outloud; such as I did when I read this sentence that Faith posted.
"As a child, Armstrong was often singing in hospitals, which gave him great experience as well as broadened his musical outlook since he had to sing songs from musicals and other types of songs he would have never performed otherwise",
If it doesn't sound right outloud I might change it into a few sentences that flow better together. That sentence didn't sound right so i might have changed it to this:
EX: As a child, Armstrong was often singing in hospitals. That gave him great experience as well as broadened his musical outlook because at the hosipitals he had to sing songs from musicials as well as other types of music which ordinarily he would not have performed.
In my opinon it flows better then the original one.
I only did that in rare cases when there was no other way to edit those sentences properly.
Please, do explain how "worldwide celebrity" doesn't make sense in this case. If you didn't know, 'celebrity' is not only a person that is famous, but also a state of being famous, basically a synonym of fame. (Dictionaty definition of "celebrity"). So, now unless you explain to me how that makes no sense to anyone but you, I don't see why my text should be at all altered. I don't mean to be rude, I realize that you don't have to know everything, but maybe you'll look things up next time before messing with someone's text.
I have no problem with commas.
Don't really know though how in the sentense "As a child, Armstrong was often singing in hospitals, which gave him great experience as well as broadened his musical outlook since he had to sing songs from musicals and other types of songs he would have never performed otherwise", the words in italics are grammatically incorrect enough to be deleted.
Celebrity is a noun, not an adjective, which is exactly what the link you posted shows O_O. Celebrityhood would be the state of being. Towards is a preposition, and prepositions have to modify a verb. Right there it was modifying "beginning". So, that sentence would mean he was moving towards a celebrity, which isn't what you meant. You wanted to say he was on hiw way to becoming a celeb right? Then you either need becoming in there, or celebrityhood.
And yes, you did have problems with comma's. I don't have your original article anymore, but you spliced them. In the sentence you just posted, they were spliced. A comma can not join complete thoughts on its own.
"Sentence 1-As a child, Armstrong was often singing in hospitals
Sentence2-which gave him great experience as well as broadened his musical outlook
Sentence 3-he had to sing songs from musicals and other types of songs he would have never performed otherwise"
Those are 3 seperate thoughts. commas can not join things like that. You could have used a semicolon to link independent clauses, but not comma's. Even with semicolons, that sentence is a run on. However, even then it can only like 2 clauses and thats three.
Not to get into the middle of you two but I also edited a few... I only changed the actual sentence itself when it didn't sound right.
I would read each article and when a sentence didn't look right I would read that one outloud; such as I did when I read this sentence that Faith posted.
"As a child, Armstrong was often singing in hospitals, which gave him great experience as well as broadened his musical outlook since he had to sing songs from musicals and other types of songs he would have never performed otherwise",
If it doesn't sound right outloud I might change it into a few sentences that flow better together. That sentence didn't sound right so i might have changed it to this:
EX: As a child, Armstrong was often singing in hospitals. That gave him great experience as well as broadened his musical outlook because at the hosipitals he had to sing songs from musicials as well as other types of music which ordinarily he would not have performed.
In my opinon it flows better then the original one.
I only did that in rare cases when there was no other way to edit those sentences properly.
Yeah, thats what we're suppose to do; it didn't sound right because the commas were spliced.
Not to get into the middle of you two but I also edited a few... I only changed the actual sentence itself when it didn't sound right.
I would read each article and when a sentence didn't look right I would read that one outloud; such as I did when I read this sentence that Faith posted.
"As a child, Armstrong was often singing in hospitals, which gave him great experience as well as broadened his musical outlook since he had to sing songs from musicals and other types of songs he would have never performed otherwise",
If it doesn't sound right outloud I might change it into a few sentences that flow better together. That sentence didn't sound right so i might have changed it to this:
EX: As a child, Armstrong was often singing in hospitals. That gave him great experience as well as broadened his musical outlook because at the hosipitals he had to sing songs from musicials as well as other types of music which ordinarily he would not have performed.
In my opinon it flows better then the original one.
I only did that in rare cases when there was no other way to edit those sentences properly.
Listen, no offence, but I really think you have no right to do that. My sentense was in a different style than yours, and to me yours doesn't sounds right. You retold my text. That's not what editors should do, is it? Your variant would mess with my text because it just wouldn't fit. Dude, your job is to correct mistakes, not redo the whole text...
And that sentense I posted...it just had a few words removed, and I don't know why one would do it, unless the text needed to be shortened.
yours was good.
you were just making sure I was paying attention.
.. 
I don't remember missing periods, but there's always a possibility I didn't get enough sleep that day or something 
