My editing pet peeve - what's yours?

Really, spnited? Time, date, place has been the style at every paper I've worked at (and, yes, I realize that's only three papers, but still).

 

More than the what, give me the why.

Why should it be time, date place and not date, time place?

 

Always been a standard here. I don't have a "why," though.

 

I don't think it's really a big deal one way or the other but to me the most important thing is the day, not the time.

 

I've never given that "rule" much -- or any -- thought. Not even now that I've compiled style manuals for three different newspapers in my life (granted, two were college niche publications at The Big University With The Prominent J-School, but still).

Such a rule has never crossed my mind. And I'd like to think that such a rule should have a logical reason behind it.

 

Yeah, but time-date-place is a more fluid wording.

"They play next at 3 p.m. Friday in Tokyo."

"They play next on Friday at 3 p.m. in Tokyo."

 

Unless it's a tournament of some kind, when they play next probably doesn't belong in the story anyway.

 

My pet peeve is editors who over edit, think they're writers and change for change sake. Standard operating procedure at too many places nowadays.

 

OK ... "The meeting will be held at 7 p.m. April 4 at spnited's secret headquarters."

m2, the trouble with that is it's a grey area. A certain amount of copy editing IS necessary. Too much IS bad. But somebody's got to make the decision of how much.

 

I would think it'd be more logical to think DATE, then time and place.

Tell me an event happens at 3 p.m. and I'm like "Today?" or "Shit! Did I miss it?" Tell me an event happens on Friday, then I'm just like, "OK, what time?"

I'd rather learn the date first, then the time.

 

Actually, shot, the meeting will be (held in not necessary) April 4 at 7 p.m. at spnited's headquarters.

 

maybe your editor over-edits your writing because you churn out shit.
ever consider that?