# How Many Typos is Not Too Many?



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

If you were reading a 20k novella and discovered typos at the rate of one per 5k words, mostly misspellings like "seemd" or "sidesteped," how would that affect your response to the book?  Would you choose not to finish or review the book for that reason; review it unfavorably, mentioning the typos; review it for the story not mentioning the typos; or make some other response?


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

Hudson Owen said:


> If you were reading a 20k novella and discovered typos at the rate of one per 5k words, mostly misspellings like "seemd" or "sidesteped," how would that affect your response to the book? Would you choose not to finish or review the book for that reason; review it unfavorably, mentioning the typos; review it for the story not mentioning the typos; or make some other response?


For something that basic that a spell checker or a proofread should catch, I'd probably stop reading unless the story was really holding me enough to push through. If I finished reading it I'd review it and note in the review that the author could stand to give it another proofread pass. If I didn't finish reading it, I'd delete the story off my Kindle and never think of it again.


----------



## ♨ (Jan 9, 2012)

I would want you to PM me immediately so that I could fire off angry eMails to my editor, my beta readers and the people that coded the spellcheck feature in my word processing application, not to mention kick myself for not finding them on my own.

But please don't say anything about the dirty knife.  Thanks!


----------



## Rick Gualtieri (Oct 31, 2011)

Everyone has their own tolerances.  Four minor typos in a book isn't going to cause me to stop anything as long as the story is good.  For others, it might though.


----------



## sarahdalton (Mar 15, 2011)

If I find any typos I get a bit peeved, especially in a trade published book. I found some glaring typos in the Harry Potter kindle edition. I don't mention it in the review unless I find it very distracting. In that case it would be every page. 

Aim for perfection and you'll probably end up with awesome!


----------



## zoe tate (Dec 18, 2013)

Hudson Owen said:


> If you were reading a 20k novella and discovered typos at the rate of one per 5k words, mostly misspellings like "seemd" or "sidesteped," how would that affect your response to the book?


*Very* adversely indeed, because it would indicate that the publisher hadn't even taken the trouble to spellcheck. That's the height of unprofessionalism. (I'd perhaps feel a little more forgiving about typos which pass unchallenged through a spellcheck, in a self-published book).

A publisher expecting the public to pay money for his product ought to produce his product professionally, and an author choosing to be a publisher as well is voluntarily assuming the same mantle and standard of care, and ought therefore to be exposed to the same standard of criticism. Self-publishers, in my opinion, shouldn't expect to have it both ways: if we want the book-buying public to accept that our publications are "just as real and serious" as trade published books, then we need to publish professionally.



Hudson Owen said:


> Would you choose not to finish or review the book for that reason; review it unfavorably, mentioning the typos; review it for the story not mentioning the typos; or make some other response?


If that were my only problem with the book, I probably wouldn't review it. I wouldn't leave a critical review _just_ for that reason. When others do, it does put me off buying, though. It makes me assume a lack of professionalism, and that makes me think I wouldn't like the book anyway. If it's a prejudice, it's a prejudice, and I'll plead guilty to that. But it's a relatively common one among book-buyers, I think?


----------



## redacted (Dec 16, 2013)

Hudson Owen said:


> If you were reading a 20k novella and discovered typos at the rate of one per 5k words, mostly misspellings like "seemd" or "sidesteped," how would that affect your response to the book? Would you choose not to finish or review the book for that reason; review it unfavorably, mentioning the typos; review it for the story not mentioning the typos; or make some other response?


Even if they gave you a favorable review, they would still mention "self-publisher" and "typos" in the same sentence, and it would still come across as incredibly condescending. Don't give them the opportunity. A 20K book is so small, I don't see why you couldn't make sure every single word is correct.


----------



## Guest (Feb 17, 2014)

I only mention grammar or typos if the problems get in the way of enjoying the story. My tolerance level also fluctuates depending on what I am reading. If I am reading a horror novel, I tend to have a higher tolerance than if I am reading a non-fiction book or a literary work. 

And truth be told, if I am actually NOTICING typos, there is something else wrong with the story. Good writing tends to make minor typos invisible to me. It is only when the writing is clunky or disjointed that I actually start noticing mechanical problems.


----------



## D-C (Jan 13, 2014)

One single typo is too much for me (as an author) as a reader I'll forgive a couple in a book and blame the publishing houses / editors. More than two, and I'll ditch the book - unless it's a fantastic story.

There's no excuse for typos. Some always slip through the net but they can - and should - be rectified asap.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

As a reader....  Four errors total?  The number wouldn't bother me, except that those kinds of errors would kind of pull me from the book--I don't think there is really any excuse for those kinds of errors in a world with spellcheck.  I'd report them to Amazon using their in-book feature.

I wouldn't mention them in a review.

Betsy


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Hudson Owen said:


> If you were reading a 20k novella and discovered typos at the rate of one per 5k words, mostly misspellings like "seemd" or "sidesteped," how would that affect your response to the book? Would you choose not to finish or review the book for that reason; review it unfavorably, mentioning the typos; review it for the story not mentioning the typos; or make some other response?


There shouldn't be errors that a spellcheck would catch. I don't understand why there would be. Now other errors or typos such as homonyms are less of an issue. However, only four typos wouldn't make me stop reading. Not at all. I doubt very much that I would even mention that few in a review.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

JimJohnson said:


> For something that basic that a spell checker or a proofread should catch, I'd probably stop reading unless the story was really holding me enough to push through. If I finished reading it I'd review it and note in the review that the author could stand to give it another proofread pass. If I didn't finish reading it, I'd delete the story off my Kindle and never think of it again.


I don't use a spellchecker. I do pay attention to the red underling in Word. Sometimes the red line is mixed in with the green grammar line.


DaCosta said:


> One single typo is too much for me (as an author) as a reader I'll forgive a couple in a book and blame the publishing houses / editors. More than two, and I'll ditch the book - unless it's a fantastic story.
> 
> There's no excuse for typos. Some always slip through the net but they can - and should - be rectified asap.


You cannot defend typos other than the fact that some slip through.



Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I only mention grammar or typos if the problems get in the way of enjoying the story. My tolerance level also fluctuates depending on what I am reading. If I am reading a horror novel, I tend to have a higher tolerance than if I am reading a non-fiction book or a literary work.
> 
> And truth be told, if I am actually NOTICING typos, there is something else wrong with the story. Good writing tends to make minor typos invisible to me. It is only when the writing is clunky or disjointed that I actually start noticing mechanical problems.


I like your point about good writing disguising typos.


jackcrows said:


> Even if they gave you a favorable review, they would still mention "self-publisher" and "typos" in the same sentence, and it would still come across as incredibly condescending. Don't give them the opportunity. A 20K book is so small, I don't see why you couldn't make sure every single word is correct.


Difficult to do.



zoe tate said:


> *Very* adversely indeed, because it would indicate that the publisher hadn't even taken the trouble to spellcheck. That's the height of unprofessionalism. (I'd perhaps feel a little more forgiving about typos which pass unchallenged through a spellcheck, in a self-published book).
> 
> A publisher expecting the public to pay money for his product ought to produce his product professionally, and an author choosing to be a publisher as well is voluntarily assuming the same mantle and standard of care, and ought therefore to be exposed to the same standard of criticism. Self-publishers, in my opinion, shouldn't expect to have it both ways: if we want the book-buying public to accept that our publications are "just as real and serious" as trade published books, then we need to publish professionally.
> 
> If that were my only problem with the book, I probably wouldn't review it. I wouldn't leave a critical review _just_ for that reason. When others do, it does put me off buying, though. It makes me assume a lack of professionalism, and that makes me think I wouldn't like the book anyway. If it's a prejudice, it's a prejudice, and I'll plead guilty to that. But it's a relatively common one among book-buyers, I think?


Well, even major motion pictures include visual typos. The chariots in the film Gladiator apparently had motors or engines under them which briefly showed in some cuts of the film. I didn't notice them.



sarahdalton said:


> If I find any typos I get a bit peeved, especially in a trade published book. I found some glaring typos in the Harry Potter kindle edition. I don't mention it in the review unless I find it very distracting. In that case it would be every page.
> 
> Aim for perfection and you'll probably end up with awesome!


I always aim for awesome, though if I came across that word more than twice in a page, I'd grind my teeth.



Dan C. Rinnert said:


> I would want you to PM me immediately so that I could fire off angry eMails to my editor, my beta readers and the people that coded the spellcheck feature in my word processing application, not to mention kick myself for not finding them on my own.
> 
> But please don't say anything about the dirty knife. Thanks!


My lips are mum.


----------



## katherinef (Dec 13, 2012)

I'd point and laugh (privately, not in a review).  If the story is interesting and I'm reading fast, I'm not even sure I'd notice. Although, the typos I find usually aren't something a spellcheck would catch.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

Hudson Owen said:


> I don't use a spellchecker. I do pay attention to the red underling in Word. Sometimes the red line is mixed in with the green grammar line.


It's not super useful, but Word's spellchecker has saved me from more than one embarrassing typo. It'd catch 'seemd' and 'sidesteped' though, and for the couple minutes it'd take to run the spellcheck on a document, I think the effort would be worth it. YMMV, of course.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Hudson Owen said:


> I don't use a spellchecker. I do pay attention to the red underling in Word. Sometimes the red line is mixed in with the green grammar line.
> You cannot defend typos other than the fact that some slip through.
> 
> I like your point about good writing disguising typos.
> ...


Spellchecker is just another tool. I run it the last thing just to try to catch any errors that my final edit my have _inserted_.

But I am curious. Why don't you use it?


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> As a reader.... Four errors total? The number wouldn't bother me, except that those kinds of errors would kind of pull me from the book--I don't think there is really any excuse for those kinds of errors in a world with spellcheck. I'd report them to Amazon using their in-book feature.
> 
> I wouldn't mention them in a review.
> 
> Betsy


You'd report me to the boss! Oh, no! You will be unhappy to learn that spellcheck, as you have typed it is, um, misspelled. But you would be kind enough not to mention the typos in a review.



katherinef said:


> I'd point and laugh (privately, not in a review).  If the story is interesting and I'm reading fast, I'm not even sure I'd notice. Although, the typos I find usually aren't something a spellcheck would catch.


I find that spell-check is kind of clumsy if you write with a number of neologisms and unusual names. That's one reason why I don't rely on it.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Hudson Owen said:


> I don't use a spellchecker. I do pay attention to the red underling in Word. Sometimes the red line is mixed in with the green grammar line.


Well, you should. 

Actually, if you pay attention to the red underlining in Word, you _are_ taking advantage of Word's built in checker.

Which is pretty much our point -- if it's something even the most basic of spellcheckers flags, it's something that should be looked at before letting it stand.

Both the words you mention in the first post are _not words_. Even if I type them here: seemd or sidesteped, the spell check in my browser flags them as not correct. Normally, when I see that, I check 'em and change them. A right click gives me suggestions and if none of those are right I re-type the word. In this case I've not done that, since I'm using them as an example . . . but I gotta say it's making me really twitchy.  

But, even here in this very casual environment, if I type a word that's flagged as misspelled, I check it before hitting post. And sometimes I still notice a grammatical issue after I hit post and I go back and fix it. Sometimes I run across a post of mine a few days later and notice an error -- and if I do, I fix it then -- even though no one else is likely to even notice. 



Hudson Owen said:


> I find that spell-check is kind of clumsy if you write with a number of neologisms and unusual names. That's one reason why I don't rely on it.


Maybe so. We're not saying rely on it blindly -- we're saying use it as the tool it is so that your writing doesn't come across as sloppy.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Hudson Owen said:


> You'd report me to the boss! Oh, no! You will be unhappy to learn that spellcheck, as you have typed it is, um, misspelled. But you would be kind enough not to mention the typos in a review.
> 
> I find that spell-check is kind of clumsy if you write with a number of neologisms and unusual names. That's one reason why I don't rely on it.


Relying on it is one thing. Using it as an additional tool is something else. I use foreign words and names throughout my novels, but it still helps catch errors that have otherwise been overlooked, even by my editor. I also use it to help catch errors I've overlooked so my editor doesn't have to.


----------



## Jim Johnson (Jan 4, 2011)

Hudson Owen said:


> I find that spell-check is kind of clumsy if you write with a number of neologisms and unusual names. That's one reason why I don't rely on it.


I've found that adding my neologisms and unusual names to my Word dictionary does a very nice job of making the red squiggles go away.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

JimJohnson said:


> It's not super useful, but Word's spellchecker has saved me from more than one embarrassing typo. It'd catch 'seemd' and 'sidesteped' though, and for the couple minutes it'd take to run the spellcheck on a document, I think the effort would be worth it. YMMV, of course.


You're probably right.


Ann in Arlington said:


> Well, you should.
> 
> Actually, if you pay attention to the red underlining in Word, you _are_ taking advantage of Word's built in checker.
> 
> ...


Well, you know that the Greeks finished their figures in the round on the pediments of the Parthenon because they figured that Zeus would notice even if humans looking up from the ground would not.



JRTomlin said:


> Spellchecker is just another tool. I run it the last thing just to try to catch any errors that my final edit my have _inserted_.
> 
> But I am curious. Why don't you use it?


I've mentioned several reasons. Basically, I don't like anything that automates writing or editing. I'll take what Word offers and that's about it. Color me old-fashioned. I'm live whenever I engage the document.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Hudson Owen said:


> You'd report me to the boss! Oh, no! You will be unhappy to learn that spellcheck, as you have typed it is, um, misspelled. But you would be kind enough not to mention the typos in a review.


Not sure why you think I'd be unhappy? If I were writing something for publication, I'd run it through the spellchecker (spell-checker ) and add the hyphens if called for. I tend to leave the hyphens out of some words--stopped using the hyphen in the word email long before it became poular. But I would have added it for publication.

I see no reason for not using a tool that would prevent such things. *shrug*

Betsy


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Hudson Owen said:


> I've mentioned several reasons. Basically, I don't like anything that automates writing or editing. I'll take what Word offers and that's about it. Color me old-fashioned. I'm live whenever I engage the document.


Sorry, this still doesn't make sense to me.

Using a spellchecker doesn't 'automate' writing or editing. It just helps you do a better job. Why wouldn't you want that?  _Especially_ when it would help you avoid commentary in reviews about spelling errors that even the least attentive junior high student would notice?

And, anyway, if you had it in Word, both those words would have been underlined red. That being the case, it kind of feels like what you're saying is, you saw that, and _ignored_ it and left the misspellings on purpose.


----------



## Morgan Curtis (May 15, 2012)

I don't mention it, but it drives me crazy when someone walks passed the door and sees someone else peaking in and their interest is peeked.


----------



## Quiss (Aug 21, 2012)

JimJohnson said:


> I've found that adding my neologisms and unusual names to my Word dictionary does a very nice job of making the red squiggles go away.


This is especially helpful when using the same words in several books in a series.
I cannot figure out, though, why Word thinks "hovered" is spelled wrong.


----------



## crebel (Jan 15, 2009)

Hudson Owen said:


> I've mentioned several reasons. Basically, I don't like anything that automates writing or editing. I'll take what Word offers and that's about it. Color me old-fashioned. I'm live whenever I engage the document.


Then I would say you might receive negative reviews along the lines of "I could not finish this book because there were misspelled words that the most basic Spell Check would catch." Or, "There were multiple misspelled words in the book that took me out of the story." At which point you should shrug your shoulders and acknowledge the reviewer is correct and fix them if you choose to engage with the document again.

In an approximately 20,000 word document, typed with any version of Word, even if you use many, many "neologisms and unusual names", it will only take about 5 minutes to use Spell Check. If you do it every time you stop and save, even less.


----------



## redacted (Dec 16, 2013)

Hudson Owen said:


> Difficult to do.


In all honesty? No, it's not. You're talking about a 20K page novella. A tiny, tiny, TINY book. If you can't find or invest enough of your time to make sure it's error proof, frankly, you don't have the right to complain about bad reviews mentioning typos.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Let me point  out here that Hudson didn't complain about a review--he simply asked a question about what one would do if one encountered those types of errors--and gave several types of responses.  I've not seen any complaints in this thread.

Betsy


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> If you were reading a 20k novella and discovered typos at the rate of one per 5k words, mostly misspellings like "seemd" or "sidesteped," how would that affect your response to the book?


That comes out to four errors in 60 pages. I wouldn't even notice, and I have no reason to look for errors. And an author's production process is none of my business. Nor is his motivation, mental state, or favorite breakfast food.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Quiss said:


> This is especially helpful when using the same words in several books in a series.
> I cannot figure out, though, why Word thinks "hovered" is spelled wrong.


hovered

Hmmm. . . . my browser spell checker is fine with it. Though it didn't like "Hmmm". 

Maybe the way the language is set? Or do they think you mean 'hoovered' which is a word that would be used more in the UK than the US -- and maybe in Canada. That said, Firefox browser is also content with 'hoovered'.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

JRTomlin said:


> Relying on it is one thing. Using it as an additional tool is something else. I use foreign words and names throughout my novels, but it still helps catch errors that have otherwise been overlooked, even by my editor. I also use it to help catch errors I've overlooked so my editor doesn't have to.


You're right, and I really cannot argue with that. It would be nice to have an editor/proofreader's eyeballs added to the document. This whole business of putting up e-books from start to finish is expensive for me, so I rely on myself when I can. I once worked as a typesetter, and that helps.



Betsy the Quilter said:


> Not sure why you think I'd be unhappy? If I were writing something for publication, I'd run it through the spellchecker (spell-checker ) and add the hyphens if called for. I tend to leave the hyphens out of some words--stopped using the hyphen in the word email long before it became poular. But I would have added it for publication.
> 
> I see no reason for not using a tool that would prevent such things. *shrug*


Cannot really argue the point. My standard disclaimer is that I do not warrant that anything I produce is perfect.



Ann in Arlington said:


> Sorry, this still doesn't make sense to me.
> 
> Using a spellchecker doesn't 'automate' writing or editing. It just helps you do a better job. Why wouldn't you want that?  _Especially_ when it would help you avoid commentary in reviews about spelling errors that even the least attentive junior high student would notice?
> 
> And, anyway, if you had it in Word, both those words would have been underlined red. That being the case, it kind of feels like what you're saying is, you saw that, and _ignored_ it and left the misspellings on purpose.


No, I noticed them on an additional pass. The document will be reformatted and uploaded to KPD. Don't worry about that.


----------



## Sam Kates (Aug 28, 2012)

Quiss said:


> I cannot figure out, though, why Word thinks "hovered" is spelled wrong.


From context? "I hovered the carpet..." Word will think it should be 'hoovered'. 

I can't stand the squiggly lines that appear as I type so switch that function off. However, I run the finished manuscript through a complete spellcheck to catch any typos I might have missed.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Hudson Owen said:


> You're right, and I really cannot argue with that. It would be nice to have an editor/proofreader's eyeballs added to the document. This whole business of putting up e-books from start to finish is expensive for me, so I rely on myself when I can. I once worked as a typesetter, and that helps.


All the more reason to use every tool at your disposal -- especially when it's FREE!


----------



## Gertie Kindle (Nov 6, 2008)

Quiss said:


> This is especially helpful when using the same words in several books in a series.
> I cannot figure out, though, why Word thinks "hovered" is spelled wrong.


Word thinks a lot of words are spelled wrong. It especially seems to dislike possessives.

I don't mind a few typos, but I go nuts over things like peek, peak, pique. The wrong choice will make me stop reading a book because I know that won't be the only bad choice.

No, I won't write a review about it and I won't contact the author, either. I used to, but I found it's usually a waste of time.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Sorry, this still doesn't make sense to me.
> 
> Using a spellchecker doesn't 'automate' writing or editing. It just helps you do a better job. Why wouldn't you want that?  _Especially_ when it would help you avoid commentary in reviews about spelling errors that even the least attentive junior high student would notice?


He *is* using the spell-checker -- the red underline is how Word's spell-check function. Sounds like he uses the grammar-check, too. But if we point that out enough, maybe he'll get into Word's guts and figure out how to turn those tools off. Then the review fun will really begin. 

To answer the OP, I expect to find one or two errors in a full-length novel (80K-100K words), and I expect them to be stuff like a left-out word, "in" instead of "it," etc. -- the hard-to-see stuff spell-checker doesn't catch. Any more than that, and I begin to feel I'm not in competent hands. (There may *be* more than that but, like Julie said, if I'm really into the story I tend not to notice them.)


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Sam Kates said:


> From context? "I hovered the carpet..." Word will think it should be 'hoovered'.
> 
> I can't stand the squiggly lines that appear as I type so switch that function off. However, I run the finished manuscript through a complete spellcheck to catch any typos I might have missed.


I don't think Word is smart enough for context. At least, not as far as spell checking goes. Grammar checking is different. I have that totally turned off. But I type fast enough that I like the live spellchecker so I can fix things before I post.

Interesting, the browser checker flags "spellcheck" but is happy with "spellchecker". Also good with spell-checker. Go figure. 

Though, now I'm wondering if the browser has the spellchecker or if it's part of the Windows OS?


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Becca Mills said:


> He *is* using the spell-checker -- the red underline is how Word's spell-check function. Sounds like he uses the grammar-check, too. But if we point that out enough, maybe he'll get into Word's guts and figure out how to turn those tools off. Then the review fun will really begin.


Yes . . . I noted that in my earlier response here (#17) as well as commenting on it in the part of that post (#22) you didn't quote.


----------



## MonaM (Jan 13, 2014)

Ann in Arlington said:


> I don't think Word is smart enough for context. At least, not as far as spell checking goes. Grammar checking is different. I have that totally turned off. But I type fast enough that I like the live spellchecker so I can fix things before I post.
> 
> Interesting, the browser checker flags "spellcheck" but is happy with "spellchecker". Also good with spell-checker. Go figure.
> 
> Though, now I'm wondering if the browser has the spellchecker or if it's part of the Windows OS?


Grammar check is a one-way ticket to pulling your hair out, especially if you write a lot of dialogue.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

JimJohnson said:


> I've found that adding my neologisms and unusual names to my Word dictionary does a very nice job of making the red squiggles go away.


Does the Word dictionary hold all of these additions, for all books?



Terrence OBrien said:


> That comes out to four errors in 60 pages. I wouldn't even notice, and I have no reason to look for errors. And an author's production process is none of my business. Nor is his motivation, mental state, or favorite breakfast food.


You're a good man.



Quiss said:


> This is especially helpful when using the same words in several books in a series.
> I cannot figure out, though, why Word thinks "hovered" is spelled wrong.


Actually Word finds a lot of false positives, so to speak, at least in the Word 2000 version I use. I am acquainted with Word 2010, and I don't like it.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Hudson Owen said:


> Does the Word dictionary hold all of these additions, for all books?


Yes, it's pretty easy to add words. When it flags it as misspelled and you decide, no, that's exactly what I meant, you right click and one of the option is to add it to the dictionary. Only thing is be _dead sure_ it's right or else it'll always be allowed through forever after that.


----------



## zoe tate (Dec 18, 2013)

Hudson Owen said:


> I don't use a spellchecker. I do pay attention to the red underling in Word.


That _is_ a spellcheck (just one that runs automatically, if you don't disable it).


----------



## Rachel Aukes (Oct 13, 2013)

If errors pull me out of the story, they matter. And, if I see enough errors, I can't help but remember those errors as much as I remember the story. The worst book I've ever read in terms of lacking proofreading was published by Penguin. But, I hold every publisher (traditional-publisher and author-publisher) to the same professional standards. I figure it this way: if we're getting paid, we're professionals and we need to deliver professional-grade products. 

Oh, and 4 errors in a 20k novelette would be very noticeable to me. Not being difficult, just being honest. It would have to be an awesome story for me to want to read the next. My TBR pile is so big, I have to be fussy.


----------



## kathrynoh (Oct 17, 2012)

If I have to read a sentence more than once to make sense of it, that's too many! I've read 2 or 3 trad published book this year that have major typos, like missing spaces between words.  One was a best seller, the other a travel guide by a major player in that area.  I think I mentioned in the review for one and haven't got around to leaving a review for the other.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Ann in Arlington said:


> I don't think Word is smart enough for context. At least, not as far as spell checking goes. Grammar checking is different. I have that totally turned off. But I type fast enough that I like the live spellchecker so I can fix things before I post.
> 
> Interesting, the browser checker flags "spellcheck" but is happy with "spellchecker". Also good with spell-checker. Go figure.
> 
> Though, now I'm wondering if the browser has the spellchecker or if it's part of the Windows OS?


There's not a "as you go" spellcheck on the iPad, though I can use the forum spell check (two words on the button ). I do that sometimes...going to do it now to see what it flags.  Spell check, spellcheck, spell-check.


OK, used the forum "spell check." It didn't like the hyphens.  Maybe it has bonded with me.

Betsy


----------



## PC Donan (Feb 15, 2014)

It depends. If the story is really good, I would keep reading the book. If it was an ebook, I would send a note to the author so he or she can correct it.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

Morgan Curtis said:


> I don't mention it, but it drives me crazy when someone walks passed the door and sees someone else peaking in and their interest is peeked.


A sentence like that, with three errors in it, would ruin my day. But that's a whole 'nother story.


rachelaukes said:


> If errors pull me out of the story, they matter. And, if I see enough errors, I can't help but remember those errors as much as I remember the story. The worst book I've ever read in terms of lacking proofreading was published by Penguin. But, I hold every publisher (traditional-publisher and author-publisher) to the same professional standards. I figure it this way: if we're getting paid, we're professionals and we need to deliver professional-grade products.
> 
> Oh, and 4 errors in a 20k novelette would be very noticeable to me. Not being difficult, just being honest. It would have to be an awesome story for me to want to read the next. My TBR pile is so big, I have to be fussy.


I try to be professional in every job I undertake. I try my best and let it go at some point and get on with the next assignment. Tell me, why do readers accumulate such humongous book lists to be read? So that, in a way, I am to be punished because you have so many books to read? Just sayin'.


----------



## Jan Thompson (May 25, 2013)

Hudson Owen said:


> If you were reading a 20k novella and discovered typos at the rate of one per 5k words, mostly misspellings like "seemd" or "sidesteped," how would that affect your response to the book? Would you choose not to finish or review the book for that reason; review it unfavorably, mentioning the typos; review it for the story not mentioning the typos; or make some other response?


As a reader, I would say this -- If the book is by tradpub, one typo is too many. I will stop reading at the 2nd typo unless it's an author I read all the time, then I'll tweet him/her and state the page number and line.  OTOH if it's an indie book, I used to be more forgiving, but these days, since anyone can hire or even barter for proofreading services, there is no reason to have that many typos in any size book anymore. For example, do you see any typo in Hugh Howey's SAND? That's your standard, proofreaders.


----------



## Robert A Michael (Apr 30, 2012)

Step 1: Write
Step 2: Structural Edit
Step 3: Send through standard spell-check/grammar cruncher after structural edit
Step 4: Copy Edit (Or Line Edit)
Step 5: Beta-read
Step 6: Edit
Step 7: Write Blurb/Make Cover/Write Front & Back matter material
Step 8: Edit Blurb/Front & Back matter material
Step 9: Format book
Step 10: Edit page breaks (and orphans & widows if you are preparing for print)
Step 11: Once-over edit (to catch miss-spellings of your MC's name--Lydia instead of Linda or something embarrassing like that)
Step 12: Submit book (Amazon's converter uses a rudimentary spell-checker)
Step 13: Check that book appears right (previewer or proof copy of print book)
Step 14: Cross your fingers and hope you got everything.

Going through these 14 steps do not guarantee you will not make a mistake. It depends on what you consider a typo. Leave off an article? Is that a typo? It made it potentially through 3 or more edits. Used a conjunction to start a sentence? Bad form, but is that a "typo?" Used the word "said" more than 10% of the total word count? Is that a typo? How did that make it through beta-reads, let alone 2 editors (3 if you count the author's edit)? Used a period when it was a question. Is that a typo? Or does anyone even notice.

For me, I notice. Clarity of thought, expertise of story-telling, reality of character or plot--those mean more to me than spelling "balustrade" correctly. But, if I see several typos, it does send up a red flag to me. It also generally means I am disappointed in some other facet of the book. So, although there is a threshold, 4 mistakes in a short book would not make a negative impression upon me if I enjoyed the story.

I read for story, not judging professionalism. With that said, I feel it is important for us all to be as professional as we can. Not because someone on the trad side of things is watching and judging us, but because if we are sharing our stories with readers, we have an obligation to them. They are paying for the entertainment we provide. Simple. If we were a musician, wouldn't we try to remember the words to the song (sorry Xtina)? 

One day my wife said to me: "You have ruined me. I used to read books to enjoy the story. Now, I just see all their mistakes, their run-on sentences, their plot holes, and cardboard characters."

I replied: "Good. Now you know how I feel when writers review my books."


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Yes, it's pretty easy to add words. When it flags it as misspelled and you decide, no, that's exactly what I meant, you right click and one of the option is to add it to the dictionary. Only thing is be _dead sure_ it's right or else it'll always be allowed through forever after that.


Thanks for that datum.



Robert A Michael said:


> Step 1: Write
> Step 2: Structural Edit
> Step 3: Send through standard spell-check/grammar cruncher after structural edit
> Step 4: Copy Edit (Or Line Edit)
> ...


Sorry, no lists for me. And you're right--nothing guarantees perfection, especially a program that guarantees perfection.



JanThompson said:


> As a reader, I would say this -- If the book is by tradpub, one typo is too many. I will stop reading at the 2nd typo unless it's an author I read all the time, then I'll tweet him/her and state the page number and line.  OTOH if it's an indie book, I used to be more forgiving, but these days, since anyone can hire or even barter for proofreading services, there is no reason to have that many typos in any size book anymore. For example, do you see any typo in Hugh Howey's SAND? That's your standard, proofreaders.


Don't have Twitter, but your point is well taken.

NOTE: If I missed your post, sorry, I'm running as fast as I can.


----------



## Becca Mills (Apr 27, 2012)

Ann in Arlington said:


> Yes . . . I noted that in my earlier response here (#17) as well as commenting on it in the part of that post (#22) you didn't quote.


Yeah, that's why I said _if we point that out enough._ Sorry not to be clear!


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

TIME OUT.  It has warmed up sufficiently for me to put on my boots and back pack and forage for food in snowbound Brooklyn.


----------



## Just Browsing (Sep 26, 2012)

Hudson Owen said:


> Tell me, why do readers accumulate such humongous book lists to be read? So that, in a way, I am to be punished because you have so many books to read? Just sayin'.


Wait. What? I can't want to read a lot of books? How is that "punishing" you? I think you just have to accept that there are a lot of books in the world. And in fact, there are an awful lot of _good_ books in the world. So yes, you have a lot of competition. If I'm not enjoying a book, I don't feel any obligation to the author to finish it. I'm paying the author to read--the author isn't paying me. I don't have to read a book I'm not enjoying when there are so many enjoyable books out there calling to me.

I don't look for typos, but they sure jump out at me. And yes, they interrupt my reading and make the experience less pleasant. So does poor formatting. I can forgive a skipped preposition or a _here_ for _her_ if it's only a few times in the whole novel (makes no difference to me if it's trad published or self-published--everyone has access to the same proofreaders, really. Proofreading is largely outsourced by big pubs too, as is a lot of copy editing). But if I see something like _seemd_ that would have been caught by a simple spellcheck? Then yes, it looks like someone didn't do the job properly. It looks (to me, to me, to me, she sang) like laziness.


----------



## redacted (Dec 16, 2013)

Bottom line: if you want to be treated like a professional writer, then approach the work as a professional. And a professional doesn't spend his time wondering how many typos he can get away with, depending on the length of his book, because he'd rather not do this or do that or [insert cutesy excuse here]. That's just ... not very professional.


----------



## maineavalanche (Mar 22, 2013)

While typos do pull me away from a book for a second or two, I would never stop reading the story because of them if it was one every 5,000 words.  I've certainly seen them in traditionally published books and recognized them for what they were: mistakes.  We all make them and I moved on and hopefully enjoyed the book.  When you're talking 120,000 words, finding a misspelling or two doesn't sound so bad.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

I just had my first ebook done as an audiobook. Imagine my surprise, "proofing" the audiobook, to find a character "leaving down"--and to realize the narrator had read it from the manuscript! That book has been proofread and edited by many people, and by me tens of times, yet everyone missed that--your eye just skims right over it.

Well, it's fixed now! 

From my past editorial experience, I can answer the question, "When is it good enough?" When you proof again and find NO mistakes. That means there are still one or two sneaky mistakes in there that nobody has caught, but they're not glaring. A reader may find them and tell you, if you're lucky. In any case, they won't destroy anyone's experience with the book.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Hudson Owen said:


> A sentence like that, with three errors in it, would ruin my day. But that's a whole 'nother story.
> I try to be professional in every job I undertake. I try my best and let it go at some point and get on with the next assignment. Tell me, why do readers accumulate such humongous book lists to be read? So that, in a way, I am to be punished because you have so many books to read? Just sayin'.


How do you figure YOU are being punished because there are a lot of books I want to read?  My intention is to read everything I've gotten -- whether free or paid for, whether trade pubbed or independent. But, yeah, if I read the first quarter or third and I'm losing interest or annoyed with errors that _should_ have been caught before the thing was offered for sale, I'm not going to finish it and if any one asks me, I'll tell 'em why.



JanThompson said:


> As a reader, I would say this -- If the book is by tradpub, one typo is too many. I will stop reading at the 2nd typo unless it's an author I read all the time, then I'll tweet him/her and state the page number and line.  OTOH if it's an indie book, I used to be more forgiving, but these days, since anyone can hire or even barter for proofreading services, there is no reason to have that many typos in any size book anymore. For example, do you see any typo in Hugh Howey's SAND? That's your standard, proofreaders.


And I would say, "If a book is published, one typo is too many." That said, errors will creep in despite the best efforts of anyone. I'm fairly forgiving as long as they are not so numerous that I begin to pay attention/watch for them rather than just enjoying the story. Of course, if the story isn't good enough to keep me interested despite occasional errors, that's a whole different issue.

Point is, I hold all books to the same standard: I shouldn't feel the book was slapped together or that corners were cut in any stage of the production process. Doesn't matter who published the darn thing.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

The whole reason *I* have a Kindle is so that I can have a library with me at all times. There's nothing worse than running out of books to read. Which used to happen to me... Now, not so much.  And it actually rewards many authors, as they've gotten sales or downloads even though I'm not yet ready to read their books. Be a glass half full kind of person!



Betsy


----------



## Philip Gibson (Nov 18, 2013)

Is a repeated word considered a typo?

I just downloaded my latest ebook to my Kindle for PC and read right through it as a final check, trying to put myself in the mind of the reader, not knowing what comes next. I really enjoy this part. Unfortunately, I found a repeated word in the text. Stopped me dead. And now I'm wondering if one repeated word is cause enough to edit the source text and go back and re-publish.

Would you re-edit and re-publish for the sake of just one typo/repeated word?


----------



## crebel (Jan 15, 2009)

Hudson Owen said:


> I try to be professional in every job I undertake. I try my best and let it go at some point and get on with the next assignment. Tell me, why do readers accumulate such humongous book lists to be read? So that, in a way, I am to be punished because you have so many books to read? Just sayin'.


I can understand letting it go and getting on with the next assignment, but I would think one of the advantages of digital publishing is to correct anything you find or is brought to your attention of a technical nature like formatting or spelling/grammar errors is great for future readers.

I don't go back and re-read books that have an update, but every time I am ready to start a new book, I check and see whether there is an update available before I start.

I don't see how I punish you by keeping around 6 months of fiction reading (around 200 books) on my Kindle. There are millions of books out there vying for my reading dollars and time, if I choose to vet them according to number of errors in a previous title by an author, that is just my way of winnowing down the offerings. Will I miss good stories along the way? Maybe. Will I find another good story to read instead? Usually! Will I run out of great books to read if I skip yours? Definitely not.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

maineavalanche said:


> While typos do pull me away from a book for a second or two, I would never stop reading the story because of them if it was one every 5,000 words. I've certainly seen them in traditionally published books and recognized them for what they were: mistakes. We all make them and I moved on and hopefully enjoyed the book. When you're talking 120,000 words, finding a misspelling or two doesn't sound so bad.


Well put.


----------



## Just Browsing (Sep 26, 2012)

Rosalind James said:


> I just had my first ebook done as an audiobook. Imagine my surprise, "proofing" the audiobook, to find a character "leaving down"--and to realize the narrator had read it from the manuscript! That book has been proofread and edited by many people, and by me tens of times, yet everyone missed that--your eye just skims right over it.


Isn't that an enlightening process? I just had a novel narrated too, and the narrator caught an instance of one letter not italicized in a sentence (first one--I'd just missed it!), one close-quotation mark that wasn't there, a repeated word in a sentence (I changed the book to match what he read), a misspelled person's last name (spellcheck wouldn't have caught that because the misspelling was a legit version of that name--just not the spelling we were using everywhere else), one missing word, and a _here_ that should have been a _there_. And I've read that book plenty of times! as have many of others. No readers ever mentioned those things. At least with ebooks and POD, we can make those corrections quickly!


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

I've heard of writers who, when they think they have a perfectly clean manuscript, put it on kindle or use some other text to speech program to listen to it.  And often find errors.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

Philip Gibson said:


> Is a repeated word considered a typo?
> 
> I just downloaded my latest ebook to my Kindle for PC and read right through it as a final check, trying to put myself in the mind of the reader, not knowing what comes next. I really enjoy this part. Unfortunately, I found a repeated word in the text. Stopped me dead. And now I'm wondering if one repeated word is cause enough to edit the source text and go back and re-publish.
> 
> Would you re-edit and re-publish for the sake of just one typo/repeated word?


I re-published mine for that stupid "leaving down."


----------



## Carradee (Aug 21, 2010)

zoe tate said:


> it would indicate that the publisher hadn't even taken the trouble to spellcheck.


Not necessarily. There are several possibilities that could result in something like that getting past spellcheck. It's not hard to accidentally program your spell-checker to accept or ignore a word you didn't intend-and to not realize what you've done at the time. If an author's set a word to "ignore" in a file, the publisher's spell-check pass may not catch it, because the "ignore" flag will carry over. And then there's always the possibility of a typo having been added in the editing or proofreading stage, such as a line adjusted post-spellcheck.

I think you get my point. 



Hudson Owen said:


> If you were reading a 20k novella and discovered typos at the rate of one per 5k words, mostly misspellings like "seemd" or "sidesteped," how would that affect your response to the book? Would you choose not to finish or review the book for that reason; review it unfavorably, mentioning the typos; review it for the story not mentioning the typos; or make some other response?


This:


Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> I only mention grammar or typos if the problems get in the way of enjoying the story. My tolerance level also fluctuates depending on what I am reading.


[/quote]

As for what I'd do about it&#8230;depends on what it is, how much time I have, who the author is, and what kind of errors I've found. With 4-5 misspellings in a 20k-word book, if I had time, I'd briefly attempt finding contact info for the author to give them a heads-up. If I couldn't find it, I'd probably mention the typos in the review.


----------



## Robert A Michael (Apr 30, 2012)

Philip Gibson said:


> Is a repeated word considered a typo?
> 
> I just downloaded my latest ebook to my Kindle for PC and read right through it as a final check, trying to put myself in the mind of the reader, not knowing what comes next. I really enjoy this part. Unfortunately, I found a repeated word in the text. Stopped me dead. And now I'm wondering if one repeated word is cause enough to edit the source text and go back and re-publish.
> 
> Would you re-edit and re-publish for the sake of just one typo/repeated word?


Absolutely. That is why I like being in control. I can hold myself accountable for that level of quality. A reader finds a mistake, I ask them what page. I want to fix it now. Re-upload it, and move on, feeling better about myself for doing the right thing. I cannot imagine a trade publisher doing that. Too many lawyers, middle men, outsourced labor, and finger-pointing to move that fast. To my readers and my potential readers, this is one unique selling advantage I have over my competition: I am responsive.


----------



## jackz4000 (May 15, 2011)

OP--4 typo's out of 20,000 words? That's 0.02%. Well if I wasn't liking the story much and I was in one of my nit-picking crabbya$$ moods I'd probably get a migraine from the discomfort. Have a big nasty hissy-fit too. Maybe delete or burn the book for good measure.      Once I burned the Complete Works of Shakespeare because I found 23 typo's. Or probably not.

If it was a really good story 0.02% typos won't bother me much since they are everywhere in varying dosages--not that I like them one bit.  

Some authors are really good at having such a good story that those pesky typo's slide right by since you are so engrossed with the story. A whole page will go by before my typo alarm goes off and I realize I've missed a glaring, pesky typo--so I have to go back and find it to make certain it exists and read it again and that pulls me out of the story because then I have to get back to where I'd left off and by then I'm so emotionally drained I need a brandy and a Percocet or two to calm down.  

Michael Connolly is really good at this. The story is so well crafted that a typo slides right by my radar. It's like he's a stealth writer and my radar doesn't work well with him.


----------



## ecg52 (Apr 29, 2013)

I just finished reading a book by a well-known indie author who frequently is on this board. I believe it was her first book. I will not name her, but there were more than a few typos. She is very helpful with answering questions on both this board and on Amazon's kindle community. There's a horse in the book and his name is spelled two different ways. It's like she forgot how she was spelling it and then later remembered again. She also confused rain, reign, and rein. What I found odd is that the first third of book was error free, but then they started popping up here and there. Did she get tired of editing or hurry through the remainder of the book? 
Spell-checker wouldn't have caught these errors. I make lots of mistakes when typing, especially with homonyms. I try to catch them, but sometimes they slip through and usually my proofreader, beta readers, or editor will catch them. But there have been times when everyone missed an error.
The book was entertaining and I finished it without changing my opinion of the author. There is no such thing as a perfect book, but we all need to strive to make them as perfect as possible. One or two errors on every page would make me stop reading. 

Also, I didn't see anyone mention that Word's dictionary has the option to add words. So if you have odd names you can add them to the dictionary and it makes the spell-checker less cumbersome to use.


----------



## Jan Thompson (May 25, 2013)

Ann in Arlington said:


> How do you figure YOU are being punished because there are a lot of books I want to read?  My intention is to read everything I've gotten -- whether free or paid for, whether trade pubbed or independent. But, yeah, if I read the first quarter or third and I'm losing interest or annoyed with errors that _should_ have been caught before the thing was offered for sale, I'm not going to finish it and if any one asks me, I'll tell 'em why.
> 
> And I would say, "If a book is published, one typo is too many." That said, errors will creep in despite the best efforts of anyone. I'm fairly forgiving as long as they are not so numerous that I begin to pay attention/watch for them rather than just enjoying the story. Of course, if the story isn't good enough to keep me interested despite occasional errors, that's a whole different issue.
> 
> Point is, I hold all books to the same standard: I shouldn't feel the book was slapped together or that corners were cut in any stage of the production process. Doesn't matter who published the darn thing.


Good points! With so many books on Amazon these days, the more polished, the better.



jackz4000 said:


> Michael Connolly is really good at this. The story is so well crafted that a typo slides right by my radar. It's like he's a stealth writer and my radar doesn't work well with him.


I'm a Michael Connelly fan, and I call every typo as it is, unless I don't think it's a typo at all, or I don't see it, or I figure that it was his deliberate twist of the English language. I'm a big fan, but I don't give him a free pass... I want him to keep writing good books and not slack off LOL.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

jackcrows said:


> Bottom line: if you want to be treated like a professional writer, then approach the work as a professional. And a professional doesn't spend his time wondering how many typos he can get away with, depending on the length of his book, because he'd rather not do this or do that or [insert cutesy excuse here]. That's just ... not very professional.


What's the difference between a writer and a professional writer?


----------



## zoe tate (Dec 18, 2013)

Carradee said:


> Not necessarily. There are several possibilities that could result in something like that getting past spellcheck.


Clearly not so _in the case of the specific examples provided in the OP_.

In the next part of my post, which your quote above selectively omits, I acknowledged that some mistakes do pass through spellchecks and I took the trouble to specify that I'd feel less critical of those. How much clearer could I have made it? 



Carradee said:


> I think you get my point.


I do, in fact - in spite of you apparently not having got mine.


----------



## Carradee (Aug 21, 2010)

zoe tate said:


> Clearly not so _in the case of the specific examples provided in the OP_.


I pointed out ways those specific examples provided in the OP could've gotten past spellcheck.


----------



## Rachel Aukes (Oct 13, 2013)

Terrence OBrien said:


> What's the difference between a writer and a professional writer?


A professional is paid for their work (i.e. makes it available for purchase).


----------



## dalya (Jul 26, 2011)

Morgan Curtis said:


> I don't mention it, but it drives me crazy when someone walks passed the door and sees someone else peaking in and their interest is peeked.


LOL!

I think only 5% of reviewers know the word is spelled piqued. Still, I'm happy to _peak_ their interest.

As for weird typos that spellcheck should detect, I think many of those go in at the last minute. You go in to fix something in a sentence, editing in your final formatted version, and PLORP there goes the typo. Invisible to the author's eye because they're thinking about the change.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

1001nightspress said:


> Wait. What? I can't want to read a lot of books? How is that "punishing" you? I think you just have to accept that there are a lot of books in the world. And in fact, there are an awful lot of _good_ books in the world. So yes, you have a lot of competition. If I'm not enjoying a book, I don't feel any obligation to the author to finish it. I'm paying the author to read--the author isn't paying me. I don't have to read a book I'm not enjoying when there are so many enjoyable books out there calling to me.
> 
> I don't look for typos, but they sure jump out at me. And yes, they interrupt my reading and make the experience less pleasant. So does poor formatting. I can forgive a skipped preposition or a _here_ for _her_ if it's only a few times in the whole novel (makes no difference to me if it's trad published or self-published--everyone has access to the same proofreaders, really. Proofreading is largely outsourced by big pubs too, as is a lot of copy editing). But if I see something like _seemd_ that would have been caught by a simple spellcheck? Then yes, it looks like someone didn't do the job properly. It looks (to me, to me, to me, she sang) like laziness.


You can read as many books as you like. If the growing pile of unread books were to make you progressively critical of the next book you read, then the pile itself is adding a layer of expectations for that book. That's all.



zoe tate said:


> Clearly not so _in the case of the specific examples provided in the OP_.
> 
> In the next part of my post, which your quote above selectively omits, I acknowledged that some mistakes do pass through spellchecks and I took the trouble to specify that I'd feel less critical of those. How much clearer could I have made it?
> 
> I do, in fact - in spite of you apparently not having got mine.


Take no offense. I don't have time to answer every point of every post.



Terrence OBrien said:


> What's the difference between a writer and a oroifessional writer?


One gets paid. I always considered myself a professional actor in New York because I got paid for what I did. No one cared what degree you had or workshop you had passed through. As to the other point about not being professional because I worry over typos--well, I'm concerned enough about them to ask the general question about threshold tolerance for errors, to which I have received numerous and varied replies.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

maineavalanche said:


> While typos do pull me away from a book for a second or two, I would never stop reading the story because of them if it was one every 5,000 words. I've certainly seen them in traditionally published books and recognized them for what they were: mistakes. We all make them and I moved on and hopefully enjoyed the book. When you're talking 120,000 words, finding a misspelling or two doesn't sound so bad.


Yes. Here I will tell you the best story I know about errors in a novel. James Joyce's Ulysses was banned in Boston. Sylvia Beach of Shakespeare & Co. bookstore in Paris published the first edition, which I have read, contained some 5,000 errors, probably mostly printer's errors though Joyce had notoriously poor eyesight. Everyone who was anyone in Paris in the 1920's read Ulysses. George Gershwin bought a copy. Now get this: Because of the extraordinary atmosphere of experimentation at the time, most readers of the novel thought that the errors were part of writing itself! Successive editions of the book produced different, more authoritative texts,


----------



## vrabinec (May 19, 2011)

Hudson Owen said:


> Yes. Here I will tell you the best story I know about errors in a novel. James Joyce's Ulysses was banned in Boston. Sylvia Beach of Shakespeare & Co. bookstore in Paris published the first edition, which I have read, contained some 5,000 errors, probably mostly printer's errors though Joyce had notoriously poor eyesight. Everyone who was anyone in Paris in the 1920's read Ulysses. George Gershwin bought a copy. Now get this: Because of the extraordinary atmosphere of experimentation at the time, most readers of the novel thought that the errors were part of writing itself! Successive editions of the book produced different, more authoritative texts,


Hmm, maybe that's why that "Who do you write like" site said I write like James Joyce.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

Ann in Arlington said:


> I've heard of writers who, when they think they have a perfectly clean manuscript, put it on kindle or use some other text to speech program to listen to it. And often find errors.


Excellent point. I really need to purchase a Kindle. I do have Kindle for pc, but of course, that's not the same thing.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

vrabinec said:


> Hmm, maybe that's why that "Who do you write like" site said I write like James Joyce.


Good one. All you need to do now is get banned in Boston, sport a black eye patch, and claim your ticket to world fame as a writer. Joyce was a weak poet, _per se_, yet there are wonderful riffs in his dense prose, including the famous Molly's "yes yes yes" sequence, which would have been shredded by grammar check.


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

Hudson Owen said:


> If you were reading a 20k novella and discovered typos at the rate of one per 5k words, mostly misspellings like "seemd" or "sidesteped," how would that affect your response to the book?


I'd be so furious, I'd probably smash my Kindle against the wall.

One time I went to a drive-in, and the movie sucked so bad, I slashed the seats.


----------



## Guest (Feb 17, 2014)

Hudson Owen said:


> If you were reading a 20k novella and discovered typos at the rate of one per 5k words, mostly misspellings like "seemd" or "sidesteped," how would that affect your response to the book? Would you choose not to finish or review the book for that reason; review it unfavorably, mentioning the typos; review it for the story not mentioning the typos; or make some other response?


If the book is entertaining, I'll finish reading it. However, if I write a review, I'll mention the typos.


----------



## Gertie Kindle (Nov 6, 2008)

I've been replacing some of my paperbacks with ebooks and one of my favorites, published by Harlequin, had typos on just about every page. Good thing I didn't toss the paperback. 

I read it again recently. No typos. I guess Harlequin republished it and it appeared automatically on my Kindle.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> I've been replacing some of my paperbacks with ebooks and one of my favorites, published by Harlequin, had typos on just about every page. Good thing I didn't toss the paperback.


Paperbacks are much better than Kindles for throwing across the room.


----------



## melbatron (Dec 8, 2013)

My $0.02: four typos in a novella? That wouldn't bother me, unless it was the same word misspelled the same way each of the four times. I doubt I would stop reading just for that, but I would mention it in a review (if it were the same word.) If it were just random words, I would let it slide completely. That happens in any written piece anywhere in the world.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Gertie Kindle 'a/k/a Margaret Lake' said:


> I've been replacing some of my paperbacks with ebooks and one of my favorites, published by Harlequin, had typos on just about every page. Good thing I didn't toss the paperback.
> 
> I read it again recently. No typos. I guess Harlequin republished it and it appeared automatically on my Kindle.


Is it the same typos over and over and over? It sounds like an OCR problem. I once ran across a book that every "the" was "die"


----------



## Sam Kates (Aug 28, 2012)

cinisajoy said:


> Is it the same typos over and over and over? It sounds like an OCR problem. I once ran across a book that every "the" was "die"


_Die Great Gatsby_

_Die Shining_

_Die Book Thief_

_Die Merchant of Venice_ - that's my favourite. We studied it for O Level English Lit and I often wished the bloody thing would go away and die. lol!


----------



## readingril (Oct 29, 2010)

I've read several Nora Roberts' HQNs from Overdrive that were clearly OCR'd without much proofing. Made me glad I hadn't *purchased* the books!


----------



## DRMarvello (Dec 3, 2011)

Hudson Owen said:


> Does the Word dictionary hold all of these additions, for all books?


When you add a word to Word's dictionary, you are adding it to a "custom" dictionary stored on your hard drive. You can actually create multiple custom dictionaries if you want. I created a "VaetraChronicles" custom dictionary for words that are unique to my series. I attach that custom dictionary just to my Vaetra Chronicles novels, so those same words will still trigger a spelling error in other documents.

Another thing you can do with custom dictionaries is modify them. For example, if you accidentally add a misspelled word to your dictionary, you can modify the dictionary to delete it. The modify feature also lets you add words to a custom dictionary in bulk, so you can, for example add all the proper names from a series at once.

To get to the custom dictionaries, bring up the spelling and grammar dialog (in Windows it's F7 or Tools, Spelling and Grammar). Click the "Options" button at the bottom of the dialog. Then click the "Custom Dictionaries" button. You should see CUSTOM.DIC listed if you've ever added a word through the Spelling & Grammar check. Through that dialog, you can attach additional dictionaries to your document, change which dictionary gets your additions (by making it the default), or create a new custom dictionary. [These instructions are from Word for Windows 2003, so you may have to dig around a little if you are using a newer version of Word.]

** Back to the original question ***

As for how many typos are too many, it would have to be a lot for me. Every time I encounter a typo in a Kindle book, I make a note of it. After about 20, I usually stop noting them, but I don't stop reading unless I don't like the story. (If I don't like the story, I rarely get to 20 notes.) I don't think I've ever read any book that didn't get at one or two notes. On average, I'd say I make four notes per book. Your ratio of one typo per 5,000 words isn't terribly unusual, in my experience. I suspect most authors believe their work is a lot cleaner than it actually is.


----------



## Gertie Kindle (Nov 6, 2008)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Paperbacks are much better than Kindles for throwing across the room.


So true. If it had been the paperback, I would have scored two points in the trash can.


----------



## Robert A Michael (Apr 30, 2012)

I don't think that I have ever heard someone say, "That book was alright, but at least it didn't have any typos."

I think if I put aside every book when I found the first typo, I would read 80% less books. I find them everywhere from Harlan Coben, to Stephen King, to Lee Child, to Anne Rice. No one is perfect. Even a _team_ of someones aren't perfect. To expect perfection or else is unrealistic. It is your choice, and your preference. Your reading habits are yours and I am sure you are not alone.

On the other hand, it always amazes me the sheer amount of books that become quite popular that have tons of 5-star reviews that even comment on the atrocious spelling, typos, confused homophones, and poor editing. Of course, the 1- and 2-star reviews mention them as well. I see the mistakes in the sample (oftentimes in the blurb as well), and I think: I guess to some folks this does not matter enough to withhold spending $3 on it.

I think the same thing every time I get in line at McDonald's. Sometimes quality matters less than sustenance for value. And for every book marred by poor editing, there is someone lauding its value as a tale--bum-bum-bum-bum-BUM, they're lovin' it.


----------



## katherinef (Dec 13, 2012)

Robert A Michael said:


> I don't think that I have ever heard someone say, "That book was alright, but at least it didn't have any typos."


I have. It was something like, "I didn't like the book, but kudos to the author for having no typos." I remember seeing that in a review for one self-pubbed book, but I can't remember which one it was.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

In this instance, I rushed to get the book ready for the formatter, who I had booked a month in advance.  As we all know, haste makes waste.

As for spell check, all the words were underlined in red.  I just didn't notice them on my last pass through the mss.  Chalk that up to fatigue.  The Kindle previewer caught them while I was uploading the text to KDP.  I allowed the upload to proceed and went back to the Word doc, made the corrections and will shortly have a corrected prc.

Some of you would have dumped the book, others would have kept reading if you liked the story.  I understand.  I would make a distinction between professionalism and perfectionism.  Pros get enough things right to go on publishing.  Perfectionists rarely achieve their aim--and then, does it matter in an imperfect world?

Special thanks to DRMarfello for his detailed instructions on how to build a custom dictionary.

Thanks to the two mods who commented on this thread.  Hope I didn't ruffle your feathers too much.

Thanks to everyone, really.

It's encouraging to me that you would hold indie self-pubbed books to the same standards as trade published.  Now, that's professionalism!


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

> On the other hand, it always amazes me the sheer amount of books that become quite popular that have tons of 5-star reviews that even comment on the atrocious spelling, typos, confused homophones, and poor editing. Of course, the 1- and 2-star reviews mention them as well. I see the mistakes in the sample (oftentimes in the blurb as well), and I think: I guess to some folks this does not matter enough to withhold spending $3 on it.
> 
> I think the same thing every time I get in line at McDonald's. Sometimes quality matters less than sustenance for value. And for every book marred by poor editing, there is someone lauding its value as a tale--bum-bum-bum-bum-BUM, they're lovin' it.


There is no reason for anyone to change their standards to keep me happy. And there is no reason for me to expect anyone to care what I want.


----------



## Joe_Nobody (Oct 23, 2012)

Didn't Mr. Blake post recently that the NY standard was one error in every 15,000 words?

If I recall, he said he tried to maintain a quality level of one per 12,000 words.


----------



## Bluebonnet (Dec 15, 2013)

M. Prawnypants said:


> LOL!
> 
> I think only 5% of reviewers know the word is spelled piqued. Still, I'm happy to _peak_ their interest.
> 
> As for weird typos that spellcheck should detect, I think many of those go in at the last minute. You go in to fix something in a sentence, editing in your final formatted version, and PLORP there goes the typo. Invisible to the author's eye because they're thinking about the change.


"Peaked" is a legit word, meaning "having a sickly appearance." (Peak-ed, two syllables.) "You look a little peaked today." Also means "pointed." (One syllable.) "He wore a peaked cap." I believe the word is also used to describe a supreme achievement: "She peaked in 1990 when she won the Academy Award."

"Piqued," "a state of vexation," yes, few people know how to spell it.

"The doctor was piqued when he saw how peaked she looked. Then the nurse peeked in the door ..."


----------



## Shinteetah (Jul 24, 2012)

Bluebonnet said:


> "The doctor was piqued when he saw how peaked she looked. Then the nurse peeked in the door ..."


Nice!

As for the original question.... 


> Would you choose not to finish or review the book for that reason; review it unfavorably, mentioning the typos; review it for the story not mentioning the typos; or make some other response?


I wouldn't quit a book for typos unless they made it hard to follow. I do find both spelling and grammar errors very jarring and they will knock me out of a scene; I don't just read seamlessly over them as some do. I would review the story honestly but mention the typos.

I think clean manuscripts are a big part of professionalism, and self-publishers should strive to be error-free or at least as close as possible. There's a lot of hard work in writing and editing; let's at least get the easy stuff right.


----------



## Usedtoposthere (Nov 19, 2013)

katherinef said:


> I have. It was something like, "I didn't like the book, but kudos to the author for having no typos." I remember seeing that in a review for one self-pubbed book, but I can't remember which one it was.


I'm pretty sure I've had that review.


----------



## Catchy (Mar 3, 2012)

I made a post here a while ago about a book I ordered online that had french flaps, spot varnish, interior cover images...and it was a work of art in my opinion. Others didn't think these things were important or valuable, but someone does or they wouldn't still do them.

I feel the same way about content. I want the writer to be smarter than I am. I don't want to read about a character set in the 1400s wearing an item of clothing that didn't appear until the 1700s. I want the editing to be as clean as possible (and I know something will always get through).

In short, I think cover design and writing and editing and typesetting are crafts that should be honoured and respected, valued and cherished. A book should be proudly displayed on your shelves.

I guess I'm on the wrong board to be focusing on these things though. Pretty hard to put an e-book on on my shelf, or admire the binding. I realize technology moves on, but I hope there will always be place a in literature and publishing for true craftsmanship.


----------



## rjspears (Sep 25, 2011)

I liked the movie analogy one of the other posters mention.  I've seen major multi-million dollar movies that I've plunked down $10-$15 to see things like continuity errors or other issues pop-up.  

Stanley Kubrick is an extremely fastidious filmmaker, but I caught the same mailbox in one scene being used in another scene set in a neighborhood miles away later in the movie.  And I still enjoyed the movie despite this.  

So, like many of the other posters, I don't let typos be a deal breaker is the books is good with an engaging plot and interesting characters along with good writing.  Now, if the plot is bad, the characters bland, and the rest of the writing bad, then I leave the book.  I don't leave a bad review, though.  The writing life is hard enough and I know they'll be others who do that dirty work.

I did contact one author about typos I caught his book, and while he was grateful, I felt like a real pest.


----------



## Judy Powell (Sep 25, 2011)

4 typos in a 20,000 word novella is not a turn-off, in my opinion.  Of course, we all want perfect stories out there but even with professional editors and beta readers on the team, as a reader I understand that some errors slip through the cracks.  

I'm presently reading a graduate level text book on abnormal psychology and am only in chapter 4 but have already found 10 typos and 2 grammatical errors (I jot them down as I find them, that's why I have exact figures; it's a habit of mine).  This text was produced by a reputable publisher and reviewed by a team of editors and yet  - 10 typos in the first 4 chapters.  For me, this has not made the reading experience less valuable.  I plan to drop a line to the editor to make her aware of the ones I found, not in the spirit of complaining but just so she can have them corrected before the next print run (this book was just printed in early January 2014 and released to the public the third week of Jan - I know because my professor had us waiting for the print run so we could get it for our first class of Spring semester).  Maybe they were in a hurry.  Who knows?

I believe many readers will forgive typos if they are few and far between (especially if they're really enjoying the story).


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

Judy Powell said:


> 4 typos in a 20,000 word novella is not a turn-off, in my opinion. Of course, we all want perfect stories out there but even with professional editors and beta readers on the team, as a reader I understand that some errors slip through the cracks.
> 
> I'm presently reading a graduate level text book on abnormal psychology and am only in chapter 4 but have already found 10 typos and 2 grammatical errors (I jot them down as I find them, that's why I have exact figures; it's a habit of mine). This text was produced by a reputable publisher and reviewed by a team of editors and yet - 10 typos in the first 4 chapters. For me, this has not made the reading experience less valuable. I plan to drop a line to the editor to make her aware of the ones I found, not in the spirit of complaining but just so she can have them corrected before the next print run (this book was just printed in early January 2014 and released to the public the third week of Jan - I know because my professor had us waiting for the print run so we could get it for our first class of Spring semester). Maybe they were in a hurry. Who knows?
> 
> I believe many readers will forgive typos if they are few and far between (especially if they're really enjoying the story).


Text books of the last 20 years, or so, can be quite horrible, not only for typos but matters of fact. I came across a history text that stated that the atomic bomb was used in the Korean War. It's true that General MacArthur wanted to nuke the Chinese and was relieved of command for that reason by President Truman. However, the only nuclear weapons used in war were the two bombs the U.S. dropped on the Japanese. Unbelievable error.


----------



## SHARK BEACH (Jan 22, 2014)

Many readers complain that self-published novels are saturated with errors. I am constantly reviewing my novels for problems even after publication. It is easiest to buy a copy of your book and look through it. Easier to spot them that way when holding a paperback in your hands.The great thing about Amazon is that you can revise until the cows come home as long as you have not officially registered your ISBN with Bowkers after they have issued it to you.

This has been a public service announcement from SHARK BEACH - Pamela Westwood!


----------



## swolf (Jun 21, 2010)

When my kids were younger, they had a picture book that explained the solar system.  When it covered the phases of the moon, it actually said the moon changed shape because of the Earth's shadow falling on it. 

How does that get past an editor?


----------



## Jan Thompson (May 25, 2013)

swolf said:


> When my kids were younger, they had a picture book that explained the solar system. When it covered the phases of the moon, it actually said the moon changed shape because of the Earth's shadow falling on it.
> 
> How does that get past an editor?


LOL!


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

swolf said:


> When my kids were younger, they had a picture book that explained the solar system. When it covered the phases of the moon, it actually said the moon changed shape because of the Earth's shadow falling on it.
> 
> How does that get past an editor?


Our mistake is in thinking that the editor actually knows these things.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

SHARK BEACH said:


> Many readers complain that self-published novels are saturated with errors. I am constantly reviewing my novels for problems even after publication. It is easiest to buy a copy of your book and look through it. Easier to spot them that way when holding a paperback in your hands.The great thing about Amazon is that you can revise until the cows come home as long as you have not officially registered your ISBN with Bowkers after they have issued it to you.
> 
> This has been a public service announcement from SHARK BEACH - Pamela Westwood!


What stops an author from change after Bowker registration?


----------



## tknite (Feb 18, 2014)

How many? Well, I can't pick an exact number. It depends on where they are and how long the book is. If you have 80,000 and there's two typos somewhere in the middle and pretty spaced out, I'll notice (I always notice) but I'll keep reading. I spot typos in trade published books all the time. Doesn't stop me from the latest in a favorite series of mine.

Now, if you have, say, 2 typos on the first page...eh, well, if I'm looking at your book in a preview, I probably won't buy it. Because having two typos on the first page gives me the impression that your book is filled with typos (even if it's not), and so, I won't read any further.

This is one of those "it depends" questions -- and, of course, every person has different preferences, so there's really no telling how any one individual reader will respond to typos until they do.


----------



## Sandra K. Williams (Jun 15, 2013)

Terrence OBrien said:


> What stops an author from change after Bowker registration?


Nothing.


----------



## ChrisWard (Mar 10, 2012)

One is too many. However, practically every book I ever read had a couple so I wouldn't worry too much if I found four or five across a full novel. I've read some indies (mainly on request of the authors) that were absolutely littered, as in at least one per page, and while I was able to go past that because I liked the story, it's not something I enjoy or like to see. There are a lot of stories out there, and I'm going to choose one that I don't expect will have any typos. It's just bad form. In my own books I want there to be as few as possible, and every year or so I go back and read everything, hoping to weed out a couple more. I don't really care what other authors do, but I want my books to be as clean as possible. However, it's within reason. I pay an editor and have a couple of volunteer proofreaders for my novels, but I can't afford to even pay someone $50 to proofread each 3,000 word short story, so I do those myself and that's not about to change.


----------



## Amanda Hough (Feb 17, 2014)

I say this as a reader, writer and an editor of 20 years.  None are acceptable.


----------



## Guest (Feb 19, 2014)

Hudson Owen said:


> If you were reading a 20k novella and discovered typos at the rate of one per 5k words, mostly misspellings like "seemd" or "sidesteped," how would that affect your response to the book? Would you choose not to finish or review the book for that reason; review it unfavorably, mentioning the typos; review it for the story not mentioning the typos; or make some other response?


I think I'd give a fair assessment of the story and ignore the typos. I would mention them to the author privately. There is no reason to cause him/her embarrassment unless it's so riddled with errors that you can tell it was not proofed at all.


----------



## Carol (was Dara) (Feb 19, 2011)

Hudson Owen said:


> If you were reading a 20k novella and discovered typos at the rate of one per 5k words, mostly misspellings like "seemd" or "sidesteped," how would that affect your response to the book? Would you choose not to finish or review the book for that reason; review it unfavorably, mentioning the typos; review it for the story not mentioning the typos; or make some other response?


I've only read the first post of this thread, so I may just be repeating what's already been said. But personally, my limit would be around 10 typos in a 20K novella. More than that and it would become distracting enough to mess with my reading experience. I wouldn't particularly do anything about it; I'd just mentally file the author in my "do not read" list. If I knew him personally I might PM/email him with a list of the errors, depending on whether he struck me as the type who'd be grateful or the type who'd get insulted.


----------



## Seppie (Jan 20, 2014)

Bluebonnet said:


> "The doctor was piqued when he saw how peaked she looked. Then the nurse peeked in the door ..."


This usage would only be correct if he was irritated by how pale and wan she was. Otherwise, it would be his interest or curiosity that was piqued.


----------



## Bluebonnet (Dec 15, 2013)

Seppie said:


> This usage would only be correct if he was irritated by how pale and wan she was. Otherwise, it would be his interest or curiosity that was piqued.


I was making a joke. However, here is the context I had in mind: the doctor had been treating the patient and had expected her to get better, so he was piqued when he saw that she had not improved. He would be irritated because she had been a noncompliant paitient -- she had not followed his instructions, had not taken her medicine, something like that.


----------



## Abalone (Jan 31, 2014)

That reads like the beginning of a cheesy adult after-hours story.  

What is Bowker registration? I looked at their site but what does that have to do with Amazon's AZIN/ASIN? Or is that specifically for CreateSpace books?


----------



## Seppie (Jan 20, 2014)

Bluebonnet said:


> I was making a joke. However, here is the context I had in mind: the doctor had been treating the patient and had expected her to get better, so he was piqued when he saw that she had not improved. He would be irritated because she had been a noncompliant paitient -- she had not followed his instructions, had not taken her medicine, something like that.


Just more proof that context matters!


----------



## Guest (Feb 19, 2014)

Terrence OBrien said:


> What stops an author from change after Bowker registration?


It costs money to make changes. And if there are too many changes, Bowkers will tell you to get a new ISBN and issue a new edition.


----------



## Guest (Feb 19, 2014)

TriplettA said:


> I say this as a reader, writer and an editor of 20 years. None are acceptable.


In that case, would you be so kind as to point us to some of the books you edited, so that we can all marvel at what perfection looks like?


----------



## Guest (Feb 19, 2014)

AA2014 said:


> That reads like the beginning of a cheesy adult after-hours story.
> 
> What is Bowker registration? I looked at their site but what does that have to do with Amazon's AZIN/ASIN? Or is that specifically for CreateSpace books?


Bowkers is the U.S. company responsible for issuing ISBNs.


----------



## Bluebonnet (Dec 15, 2013)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Bowkers is the U.S. company responsible for issuing ISBNs.


I posted this link on another thread, but it might be useful here too. Link to the FAQ page about ISBN:

http://www.isbn.org/faqs_general_questions

Under the question "Who can assign ISBNs to a publisher?" it says "There are over 160 ISBN Agencies worldwide, and each ISBN Agency is appointed as the exclusive agent responsible for assigning ISBNs to publishers residing in their country or geographic territory. The United States ISBN Agency is the only source authorized to assign ISBNs to publishers supplying an address in the United States, U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam and Puerto Rico and its database establishes the publisher of record associated with each prefix. "

Under the question "How and where do I register my ISBN?" it says: "Once ISBNs have been assigned to products they should be reported to R.R. Bowker as the database of record for the ISBN Agency. Companies are eligible for a free listing in various directories such as Books in Print, Words on Cassette, The Software Encyclopedia, Bowker's Complete Video Directory, etc."


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

TriplettA said:


> I say this as a reader, writer and an editor of 20 years. None are acceptable.


None means "not one," so the proper response should read: "None is acceptable."



Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> It costs money to make changes. And if there are too many changes, Bowkers will tell you to get a new ISBN and issue a new edition.


It certainly does. Years ago, I paid nearly $200 to correct one author's error in a book of poems after I had used up my allotment of corrections, That book has yet to pay back my investment in it. I'm not likely to do that again.


----------



## beccaprice (Oct 1, 2011)

TriplettA said:


> I say this as a reader, writer and an editor of 20 years. None are acceptable.


I agree with TriplettA - the best answer is none.

Realistically, there will be some - but I make every effort in my writing that there be none, including running it past two editors. And yeah, some things will still creep in. Perfection is next to impossible, but it should be our goal.


----------



## Hudson Owen (May 18, 2012)

beccaprice said:


> I agree with TriplettA - the best answer is none.
> 
> Realistically, there will be some - but I make every effort in my writing that there be none, including running it past two editors. And yeah, some things will still creep in. Perfection is next to impossible, but it should be our goal.


I'll tell you a short story.

In sixth grade, the teacher made me wait after class to get my report card for the semester. She transferred the grades from her black book to my yellow report card in ink: A A A A A, *B*. I thought the B was was unnecessarily cruel, at the time, though maybe not. The lesson I carried forward was that this was what the world would do to me. I never got straight A's, though I have won various competitions and scored 100% on tests. I try hard, I really do, especially in life threatening situations. But I am not a perfectionist.


----------

