Amie Doughty > Recent Status Updates

Poor copy editing. Numerous missing words and other errors.

Interesting story, but the voice is problematic. The main characters, who are American, use some vocabulary not generally used by Americans (swot, etc.).

Atrocious editing. Clearly author and editor don't know what half a century is and possessives are beyond their skill.

A glossary of tennis terms does not give the author free reign to make hideous errors like saying a men's match is 7 sets or a women's 5. Ugh.

So the storyline is fine, but apparently Bennett and her editors don't pay attention to geography. Since when it Portugal on the Mediterranean?

I don't know who did the copy editing for this book, but the fact that they missed basic verb tense shifting is pathetic. It's the kind of boneheaded error I expect from my creative writing students, not a published work.

If you're going to reference others works, get your info correct. There are 5 books in the original Percy Jackson series, not 7. (There are 7 in the Harry Potter series.) Not a difficult fact to check. I will grant that Riordan has added to the series, but if you count the newest ones, you should also count the Heroes of Olympus series since PJ plays a major role in it before the newest books.

I just love it when the author and editor can't remember the last name of the main character between the first and third page of a novel. (Officially pages 7 and 9) 🙄

It would be really nice if author and editor learned the difference between sat and set. Ugh

I like Roberts usually, but this second book of the two in the collection is rough. Not the major error of the first, thankfully, but too many proofing errors. Also, the first half of the novel is disjointed since it's recasting much of the first from a different pov. Once the events of that book is over, it improves, though I don't sympathize much with Georgia, whose actions are problematic.

First novel feels like a couple pages were skipped.

Dear editors, The names Nathaniel and Nathan are not the same. Stop using them interchangeably unless the author says Nathan is Nathaniel's nickname. She has not done so.

I don't know who proofread this book (if anyone), but I've seen at least 3 errors with character names, and that is just inexcusable.

Seriously, it's like Hamilton and/or her editors just yanked out some of the events but left references to them later. What concert is Angel talking about? As always, interesting story, bad writing and editing.

JFC, I wish Hamilton could get her timeline straight. There were 60 hours left on the execution when the story started, it was extended 8, and now suddenly there are fewer than 7 left even though a whole day hasn't passed. Then they return to the hospital just hours after leaving, but Hamilton writes as if a full day has passed. Sloppy. Her stuff is always sloppy.

Ok, I know this guy is a secondary character, but it would be nice if Robb and or her editors would pay attention to his bleeping name. He's bounced between Sanchez and Santiago over the past several books. There are other irritating editorial issues in the series as well (like how to spell the name of the shelter Roarke establishes--it's been Dochas and Duchas in various books), but this one is just inexcusable.

Ok, I know "anal" is being used as an abbreviation for analysis in the book, but WHY? Seriously, Robb has never used it before and now she's using it in a story involving sex crimes.

Continuity errors drive me crazy, esp. with recurring characters. Somehow Webster has been demoted to Detective mid-book.

Enjoying the novel. It's creating anxiety about Evie and her friends (as it has since the beginning), so I'm reading more slowly than normal to try to cope. That is the best compliment I can give a book.

Copy editing quality has gone down in the past few books. I was looking forward to seeing Andres' point of view, but thus far it's just been the same scenes from his eyes rather than real insight into what is happening outside his room where Sam is kept. Even the dialog she couldn't understand isn't given. Disappointing.

Dear God, learn what nonplussed means. Also learn how to format dialog ending in question marks and exclamation points. (Really, the books are very strong other than some ugglesome mechanical and grammatical issues.)

The premise of the novel is interesting, but the book is in desperate need of both stylistic and copy editing. It's overwritten so far, and given the education of a British royal, Edward's narrative and dialog should be grammatically correct and in British English. Oy.

Dear God, learn your past participles. This story is fascinating, but the grammatical errors are inexcusable.

Really enjoying the novel so far. Very funny and engaging characters. Not sure why it's present tense for the narrative, but it's not too distracting.

Some interesting ideas, but the book needs another round of proofreading, and the author needs to learn the difference between lighting and lightening. Oy.

Thayer's story is mediocre. My biggest issue, however, is with the poor proofreading. I'm assuming whoever digitized this book didn't bother to double check that it was done properly. There is an overabundance of spaces in longer words that, when split, are words of their own. For example, handsome was presented as hand some several times. Inexcusable.

Would someone kindly teach Yates and her editor how to write a sentence? My mind boggles at the array of unnecessary sentence fragments. (Stylistic choice only gets an author so far, and Yates has crossed the line.)

It would be nice if Child could decide how old Connor is. She keeps waffling between 2 and 3, and I'm not even halfway through the novel.