Vikki V.

I had an interesting conversation with a newer proofreader on our team yesterday. It’s too good not to share. “Try as I might, I only found three mistakes in this 2,200-word report,” she wrote to me. It seemed like she was apologizing. Here’s what I told her: “Good! That means you didn’t just find three mistakes. You confirmed that 2,197 words were already correct.” Proofreaders, I’m not sure who needs to hear this, but listen up: Don’t measure your value by the number of errors you catch. Sometimes you’ll find dozens on the page. Or just three. Sometimes not a single one, and that’s a good thing. (Zero errors is the goal, after all.) What matters is the peace of mind you give clients who rely on your careful eye. Let 𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐝 be your metric.

964

72 Comments

“Can we hop on a quick call?” Translation: “I don’t respect your time, I don’t have a clear ask, and I want free consulting without commitment.” Early in my freelance career, I used to say yes to every call. (Ok, it happened until about 5 years ago.) I'd think: What if it’s a big opportunity? What if I offend them by asking for context? 90% of the time, it wasn’t an opportunity. It was a time suck. Calls with no agenda are rarely worth your time. • They’re “picking your brain.” • They’re “exploring ideas.” • They want strategy or ideas without paying. Here’s what works better: ✔️ I ask what the call is for before scheduling. If they can’t articulate it, we don’t book it. ✔️ I pre-qualify my clients on the call-booking form. ✔️ I direct casual inquiries to email. Boundaries = respect. ✔️ I charge for strategy. Always. Because strategy is the work, not the prelude to the work. Freelancers aren’t on-call consultants or vending machines for ideas. We are business owners with booked calendars, processes, and pricing. You don’t need to be “available.” You need to be intentional. What’s your policy on “quick calls”?

723

270 Comments

I keep seeing copy editors and proofreaders getting laid off. One exec literally said: “We’ll just ask the writers to be extra careful.” Seriously? Arrgghhhhh! I want to scream, but I’m in a coffee shop and these people don’t deserve that. You’re still reading, so let me use words instead: Asking your writers to be more careful is not a plan. That’s just crossing your fingers. 🤞 You may think cutting editing is a “cost-saving measure,” but it is, in fact, a gamble with your reputation. And no, AI tools can’t catch what matters most. They won’t notice when a phrase feels biased, a claim is flat-out wrong, or the tone misses the mark. (Don’t even get me started on all the inconsistencies they overlook.) Only human editors can give true peace of mind. Look, I get it. Money’s tight, and someone upstairs is demanding cuts. But there are smarter ways to handle this. Reduce hours. Prioritize your highest-stakes content. Outsource strategically. Find a balance that works. That’s exactly what I help marketing teams figure out at Super Copy Editors. If your marketing team needs fast, reliable proofreading coverage without adding headcount, let’s talk. Free 7-day trials available: ➡️ https://lnkd.in/eWS--ZZp We can help you maintain quality on the pieces that really matter.

1,295

221 Comments

Editor PSA: “Alot” is not a word. I repeat: A. LOT. Is. Not. A. Word. As an editor, I’ve seen “alot” 𝘢𝘭𝘰𝘵. And every time, a red pen cries in despair. I get it. “Alot” feels like it should be a word. It’s quick. It’s casual. It looks like its cousins “along” and “abroad.” But unlike them, “alot” is just… wandering the dictionary parking lot without a pass. Let’s break it down: ✅ “A lot” = a large quantity ❌ “Alot” = a large mistake If you’re ever unsure, try this: Would you write “alittle”? “abit”? “aneditor’ssoul”? No? Exactly. So the next time you’re tempted to write 𝘢𝘭𝘰𝘵, stop. Take a deep breath. Give your spacebar some love. Your future editor will thank you (and so will your credibility). #EditingTips #WritingMatters #GrammarHumor #ALotToThinkAbout #EditorLife #LinkedInWit #TheEditDerr

273

156 Comments

I have learned that writers, especially technical writers, tend to thrive in remote environments, not because we are introverted or hiding behind our screens, but because writing needs space. Real space. The kind where you can think, reflect, and let ideas settle before turning them into something clear and useful. This may not be true for every writer. Some love the buzz of an office and the energy of in person collaboration. But for the vast majority of writers I have worked with, we do our best work when we have our own time and our own space to sit quietly with our thoughts. When you are writing, quiet is not a luxury. It is part of the workflow. Deep work does not happen in a room full of background chatter or constant interruptions. It happens in those moments where your brain finally unclenches and you can actually hear your own ideas forming. And honestly, comfort matters. Good writing does not appear because you are sitting in a conference room. It shows up when you are in a space that feels calm and natural to you. Your favorite chair. Your perfectly imperfect home office. Even your kitchen table with coffee in hand. Remote work does not make writers less connected or less collaborative. It gives us the environment to do what we do best: think deeply, write clearly, and create content that truly helps people.

712

68 Comments

Technical writers rarely inherit well-organized documentation. They inherit problems to solve. Outdated docs. Scattered tools. No standards. No review process. Here are 7 documentation problems technical writers inherit (and how they fix them): 1. Outdated Content Everywhere → Content audit, sunset plan, version control 2. No Style Guide or Standards → Create lightweight guide with team input → Enforce through templates 3. Tribal Knowledge Instead of Documentation → Structured SME interviews → Transfer ownership from people to docs 4. Scattered Across Multiple Tools → Tool consolidation + migration plan 5. No Review Process → Lightweight governance: peer review + SME sign-off 6. Conflicting Terminology Across Teams → Terminology workshops + agreed glossary 7. Documentation as an Afterthought → Shift-left: join planning early → Tie doc roadmap to product roadmap Technical writers don't just write. They untangle, systematize, and transform chaos into clarity. That's not content creation. That's strategic remediation. Which problem have you inherited most often? Drop the number (1-7) in the comments. 👇 Save this for the next time someone asks what technical writers actually do. Reshare if you've inherited at least 3 of these problems. 📰 Want weekly strategies for fixing broken documentation systems? Subscribe to our newsletter (link in comments). Want more career insights for technical writers: 1. Follow Technical Writer HQ 2. Like the post 3. Repost to your network

146

6 Comments

Proofreading vs proof-editing: my take. When I started out, back in 2012, I found myself doing more than a traditional proofread. That meant I wasn't only correcting what was "wrong" (proofreading) but offering suggestions to make the text more readable (proof-editing). I work with marketing and comms teams, content marketing agencies, charities, organisations and small businesses, who don't work with editors. I'd be working on raw text – text that hasn't been professionally edited. My eagle eyes would be the first to see it. There was no in-house or external editorial process. "Do whatever needs doing” quickly became my standard proofreading practice because I WAS the process. What I was doing didn't feel like copy-editing because it was language-focused rather than content-focused. But it wasn't proofreading either. Still, marketing teams and comms agencies would ask me to: overhaul the clunky sentences I’d highlighted trim the text (because it had exceeded the word count) rewrite areas I'd politely noted were repetitive. Time was of the essence (when isn't it?), and they trusted me to improve their writing. Proof-editing involves greater collaboration because I work with you to make your/your team's writing sound even better than before. Now you could argue this comes down to semantics. If you're happy with my changes and suggestions, what does it matter what the service is called? That's all well and good if you're charging for the work you're doing. I wasn't, so I separated the services (not as soon as I should have, mind). Not all copy-editors are proofreaders. They're different skill sets. And not all clients will know the difference between proofreading and proof-editing. It's up to us to be clear on what we do and what we don't do. Meghan Downs at Jammy Digital says: "The standard of work wouldn’t be as high without Yasmin. We’re writers, not trained proofreaders or proof-editors. Yasmin gives me the peace of mind not just that the work’s been done, but that it’s been done to a better standard.” 👏🏻 Here's some cool doodle art by the talented Amy Nolan. Couldn't believe my luck when I spotted this on her site. 🤡 I promise I bought it from her. I'm not using this ILLEAGALLY.

73

22 Comments

As an editor, I’ve found that most writers are absolutely okay with receiving constructive criticism as long as you start with a minimum of five compliments, then another compliment, then some positive feedback, then the negative thing, and then end with another compliment.

282

100 Comments

A few people have asked me how to get into proofreading. I thought it might be useful to others considering it, if I shared my answer. This is just my experience and may be different for others. I work with independent authors and this is general advice. Complete a training course. There are quite a lot of training providers who offer courses at various prices. It would be a good idea to have a look at the different courses to see which one best fits your requirements, as I think everyone likes to get different things out of a course. ·      Would you like to proofread or edit fiction or non-fiction, business or academic writing or have the opportunity to work on a variety of texts?   ·      Would you like a course to be tutor-led or a course that can be completed at your own pace?   ·      How would you like the content to be delivered? Through written instructions, videos or a mixture of formats?   Build a professional network.  My LinkedIn network is invaluable. A group of professionals who are at various stages of their editing and proofreading careers across a range of backgrounds, countries and ages. Some edit the same genres I do, but others edit different genres or academic or business writing. All have incredibly valuable insights into the practicalities of proofreading and editing. They also provide advice and general moral support; it’s a great community to be a part of. Practise your skills.  ·      Volunteering to proofread work for friends, family, charities, or, if you’re studying at university and have the opportunity to work on a student publication, it can be a great way to gain experience.   ·      There are some websites that offer the opportunity to volunteer to proofread a range of texts.   ·      There are also websites that offer paid work if you pass a proofreading test.   ·       LinkedIn is a brilliant place to connect with authors and learn about their books. It can introduce you to topics, issues and genres you hadn’t considered reading or working on and provides a brilliant place for meaningful conversation. #Editors and #Proofreaders is there anything I’ve missed? Please feel free to add it in the comments.

80

39 Comments

𝗧𝗶𝗽𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗧𝗲𝗰𝗵𝗻𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗪𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀: 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺 𝗪𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗢𝘂𝘁𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗗𝗼𝗰𝘂𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 (Part 2 of 4) Technical writers aren’t just documentation creators; we’re also caretakers. Our responsibility doesn't stop once a document is published. When content becomes outdated, it confuses and frustrates users, impacts support teams, and erodes trust. 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗼 𝗠𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗢𝘂𝘁𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗗𝗼𝗰𝘀 𝟭. 𝗘𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝗢𝘄𝗻𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽 & 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗸 𝗬𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗗𝗼𝗰𝘀 Maintain an internal index that maps documents to owners and doc locations, ensuring nothing slips through the cracks. 𝟮. 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁 𝗥𝗲𝗴𝘂𝗹𝗮𝗿 𝗔𝘂𝗱𝗶𝘁𝘀 Schedule recurring reviews to identify stale content before users do. Tie reviews to release cycles so product changes don’t get missed. 𝟯. 𝗜𝗻𝘃𝗼𝗹𝘃𝗲 𝗦𝘂𝗯𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝗠𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘁𝘀 (𝗦𝗠𝗘𝘀) Loop in developers, QA, and product managers to validate accuracy. A short SME review can save hours of user frustration. 𝟰. 𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗬𝗼𝘂 𝗖𝗮𝗻’𝘁 𝗚𝗲𝘁 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗬𝗼𝘂 𝗡𝗲𝗲𝗱 If SMEs are unavailable or requirements are unclear, don’t “fill in the blanks.” Outdated or inaccurate docs are worse than missing docs. Leave it out and flag it until you can obtain the correct information. 𝟱. 𝗥𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗲𝘄 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗘𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗿𝗲 𝗗𝗼𝗰 When updating a doc, check the entire doc for accuracy, not just the section you edited. 𝟲. 𝗨𝘀𝗲 𝗩𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 & 𝗔𝗿𝗰𝗵𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗢𝗹𝗱 𝗗𝗼𝗰𝘀 Archive, never delete. Old content may be required for audits, reference, or compliance purposes. Use versioning to track changes and clearly label deprecated material to avoid confusion. 𝟳. 𝗔𝘂𝘁𝗼𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗣𝗼𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗹𝗲 Use tooling (CMS workflows, scripts, or doc-as-code pipelines) to trigger alerts when APIs, features, or release notes change. Automation catches what humans miss. 𝟴. 𝗘𝗺𝗽𝗼𝘄𝗲𝗿 𝗨𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗥𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁 𝗜𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗲𝘀 Add a feedback option to every doc. When users flag an issue, act quickly and thank them. Fast updates show the docs are active and that feedback is valued. 𝟵. 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗸 𝗠𝗲𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗰𝘀 & 𝗦𝘂𝗽𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁 𝗧𝗶𝗰𝗸𝗲𝘁𝘀 Watch for documentation-related tickets or repeated questions. They are signals that something in the doc isn’t clear or current. 𝗕𝗼𝗻𝘂𝘀 𝗧𝗶𝗽: Treat docs like code. If your devs wouldn’t ship untested, outdated code, neither should you publish stale documentation. (Stay tuned for Part 3: Keeping Docs Fresh Is a Team Effort.) 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗔𝗿𝗲 𝗬𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗧𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵𝘁𝘀? How do you handle outdated documentation in your organization? Do you use scheduled audits, automation, or feedback loops to keep content fresh? Share your strategies! #TechnicalWriting #DocumentationMatters #WritersHelpingWriters

63

3 Comments

Freelance writers & editors: Stop using LinkedIn's "Open to Work" badge. [like, yesterday.] I get it. Pipelines are dusty. DMs are colder than a morgue. Ex-clients are ghosting you on reviews. NDAs are blocking you from a shiny portfolio. But "open to work"? Smacks of desperation. Know what works better than desperation? Anything. But to be specific: Writing content for yourself. → Create a value-first lead magnet → Create a before/after slide deck of an edit [using your own work] → Craft some ghostwriting samples for different genres [memoir, business, self-help] Oh yeah...and post about your knowledge, experience, and process on LinkedIn. All of those are more effective than "open to work." >>>Which one are you going to create?

42

52 Comments

Thought process of a copyeditor 👇 What does this sentence say? What is its purpose? Is its meaning clear? How does it jive with surrounding sentences? Is it consistent with the author’s voice? Does it flow? Could it be shorter? How does this sentence break down? What parts am I looking at? What’s necessary and unnecessary? Where’s the punctuation? Does it need more or fewer marks? Is everything spelled correctly? Is it factual that I should look it up? Does it need citations or permissions? (Perhaps most importantly 👇) Would changing this make it better? . . . And then we move on to the next sentence. If you need that kind of look at your manuscript, hit me up! === I’m Jeanette 👋 a copyeditor, self-editing instructor, and content writer. Follow my profile or ring my bell to see more of me in your feed! #Jeanettediting

44

11 Comments

A common mistake I see people make in their writing is leaving out the second comma in parenthetical/nonrestrictive/nonessential words, phrases, or clauses. I'm referring to that extra info that could be removed from a sentence without changing its meaning, which is often up to the writer to determine. Here's an example: "His mother, Kathleen, bakes the best birthday cakes." "Kathleen" is nonessential information for that sentence. If you remove it, the meaning of the sentence doesn't change. "His mother bakes the best birthday cakes." One of the many things I love about fiction and creative writing is that authors can use commas more liberally to cause the reader to pause where desired. Consider this sentence: "Pete is going to the concert, unless it rains." "Unless it rains" is an essential part of that sentence because if it's removed then Pete is going to that concert rain or shine! Furthermore, the meaning of the sentence doesn’t change if we remove that comma. The writer just chose to insert that comma to make the reader pause before moving on. We run into a problem when a writer mistakes a parenthetical for a pause. "His mother, Kathleen bakes the best birthday cakes." If the writer is trying to insert an aside here, they need a second comma (after "Kathleen"). If they're trying to create a pause, that gives us a messy sentence. So. If you're looking to add nonessential information midsentence, remember to insert both commas. If you're intending to create a pause for your reader, be mindful of where (and how) you choose to do so. Timothy #amediting #writingcommunity #editing #copyediting #proofreading #books #fiction 

65

12 Comments

Here's the most common mistake I see writers make when reaching out to agents: early loyalty. Writers think they need to wait for a reply before submitting to another agent. Months or years could go by in this holding pattern. Looking for an agent is akin to dating. Play the field. You should not have loyalty to any one agent until it's time to commit with a contract. No reply is a reply. Psst your friendly neighbourhood scam alert: an editor who accepts money for "connecting" you with an agent is a fraud.

16

2 Comments

Is the Em Dash Being Bullied—Or Are Writers Just Tired of Being Misread? OK, so I had to weigh in on a strange claim spreading across social media—particularly on this platform. Apparently, if your writing uses an EM dash, you didn’t write it. ChatGPT did. Or DeepSeek. Or Perplexity. Pick your machine. According to this logic, thousands of human writers—past and present—must be fakes. And yes, there are plenty of em dashes in this post, too, so feel free to report me to the Em Dash Police. Let’s get something clear. The em dash isn’t new. It’s not a sign of lazy thinking. It’s not a neon sign that says, “AI wrote this.” It’s a legitimate punctuation mark used since the 18th century. In fact, the concept of dashes as punctuation marks dates back to the 15th century. Here’s what an em dash is for: ·     It separates clauses for clarity. ·     It introduces emphasis or interruption. ·     It replaces parentheses and colons, depending on tone. That’s it. That’s all. That’s grammar. It’s not some robot watermark. It’s not a machine fingerprint. It’s style. It’s choice. It’s language in motion. Writers—real ones—choose punctuation on purpose. We know what the em dash does. We also know when not to use it. And yes, sometimes we use more than one. Because flow and meaning matter more than the approval of a comment section. So why are people—especially non-writers—acting like the em dash is guilty by association? Because an LLM occasionally uses it too? Since when did punctuation become a Turing Test? Here’s what’s actually happening: A lot of people are trying to sound like experts on writing—without understanding writing. They’ve confused style with source. Syntax with software. Grammar with gimmick. It’s easier to say “AI wrote this” than to admit you don’t understand tone, structure or rhythm. And it's far easier to point at punctuation than to engage with content. Writing has always evolved. Styles shift. Rules soften. But when a tool—like the em dash—is pushed aside by those who never learned how to use it, that’s not evolution. That’s laziness. Or fear. Or worse, groupthink. Let’s be honest: Most LLMs produce flat, forgettable copy. That’s not because of punctuation. That’s because they don’t know how to think. They predict. They don’t create. The em dash doesn’t belong to the machines. It belongs to people who know how to write. People who understand flow. People who see structure as a tool, not a threat. People who know grammar isn't an aesthetic—it's a system. So no, the presence of an em dash doesn’t mean AI wrote it. It might just mean a trained writer did. That should be respected, not questioned. And if you want to learn how to use these tools correctly—AI included—ask a writer. We use language for a living. Not likes. Now—shall we talk about the EN dash? #writingtips #contentstrategy #grammarnerd #aiwriting #chatgpt #businesswriting #contentmarketing #writingcommunity

18

5 Comments

WRITERS: Don't throw away content. Instead of the Delete key, use cut-and-paste: Keep a scrap file of longer deleted passages (full paragraph or up). It doesn't have to be outlined, doesn't have to be multiple indexed files--just a simple single file where you paste the pieces you've given up on. When you think, "Maybe I should've included that line about Tippecanoe after all. How did that go?", it'll be easier to search that file than to search your memory.

18

1 Comment

Hire a copyeditor if you're self-publishing a book. I'm talking about paying a professional who actually knows how to apply a style guide. Asking your language-nerd friends to check your work is good, but they cannot provide the same service as a trained editor who may have worked on dozens of books. I'm working with a pro editor for the first time. Last week, she sent me the copyedited manuscript of my new book, "Tiny Book Author: There's a Tiny Book in You Waiting to Be Written," where she made 295 revisions, including 145 insertions, 116 deletions, 30 formatting changes, and 4 comments/queries. Most of the edits were about punctuation, spacing, and font formatting, so it took me only a couple of hours to revise. Without her help, my book would be full of stylistic inconsistencies. I'm also collaborating with a professional book designer to create the cover. When I was working on my first tiny book, "Any Language You Want," I designed the cover by myself using Canva. That was a bad idea. (I explain why in "Tiny Book Author.") But why am I telling you all this? I'm telling you this to say that designers, editors, and publishing professionals exist for a reason. If you can afford to work with them—even just one—do it. I'm also hoping to make you curious about my new book. Raising curiosity and sharing bits of their creative process is something that indie authors should start doing well before releasing their work into the world. More on the topic in my new book. 😁

20