Homepage
Login
New Post
Profile
Suppose I'm in charge of getting a three hundred page book published. I'll do all reasonable things to get it proofread, but still there is a chance that some errors will persist.
Now the book goes to the bookstores and readers start reporting errors. I'd like to know whether the rate of errors is "acceptable" or if I haven't really done my job.
Is there any standard, or any informal rule, for how many errors are "acceptable"?
(10)More posts by @Frith254
10 Comments
Sorted by latest first Latest Oldest Best
There should be no errors. I think garnering justification or seeking comfort because they have been found is no substitute for learning from them. Any mistake is jarring for the reader and chastening for the author. We are often word blind, it's true, but we should not at any point regard overlooking mistakes as acceptable, even if there are sloppy readers, who won't notice them.
Aim for as few errors as possible. Editors and publishers may overlook the very occasional error, but not if they see five a page. Get your manuscript proofread as much as possible before you send it.
Error Rate per Page Response
total errors/total pages is one way or
total errors/ total pages*100 (Error Rate) limits should be under 1%
I prefer Defects per Million (DPM) DPM should be under 50
Total Error/(total pages * attributes per page)*1,000,000.
Attributes per page is a number predetermined for all calculation. We use a standard 300 attributes per page.
I can standardize this error across all efforts and I classify individual error codes 1-55 to pareto chart which area my defects occur most often.
i.e. typo, grammar, style, formatting etc.
The most important thing about "acceptability" of errors is that they don't disrupt the reader. That means that some errors weigh heavier than others, even if you have the same number of typos.
Consider, for example, the fact that most Americans these days get "you're" vs. "your" drilled into their head during school. It creates a bias towards the focus on these mistakes, and so I would guess that a lot more readers would notice the misuse in a sentence a lot quicker than the intentional singular use of the word 'head' earlier in this paragraph. You should be cautious of these.
Next, there's the pacing of the book itself. If you're in the middle of a gripping action sequence, a light error will probably be completely skipped over by many readers even if they see it, because they're so engaged with the scene, but a hard error will probably stop them in their tracks and make them pause and re-read the whole sentence. This disrupts the flow of your story and can really detract from the strength of a writer.
Consider the frequency of the error that occurs.
There was one book that had a silly typo -- let's say it was allusion instead of illusion (I'm going to remember what it is later). The first time I noticed it, I gave a soft snort and continued reading, my opinion of the book generally unaltered. Typos happen. However, the author persisted to use the same word, maybe once every two chapters. Every single time, they used the wrong word. It drove me absolutely bonkers, because there was no particular reason for them to be using the word all the time in the first place. I don't remember what book it was, and I actually enjoyed both the characters and the plot, but every time I open it up and get to that first typo I groan. This book again.
My general opinion is that as long as your typos are 'soft' and your book is 300 pages long, a reader can probably choose to ignore them if you have fewer than 30. If the plot/characters aren't good, they probably won't bother. On the other hand, if you only have 5 errors in a 300 page book, even though the reader may notice them, they won't remember them when thinking about the book as a whole.
The hard errors probably will be remembered regardless, but if you only have one or two (and your book is otherwise well-written), your readers will probably choose to ignore them. Just make sure they don't take place during critical scenes.
I have to edit my own books frequently. But I publish ebooks -- which allows you to update the ebook file if you find errors.
With printed stuff, you really need a second pair of eyes to find typos. The risks are too great -- especially if you are paying for advance copies.
On the other hand, print-on-demand services (like Createspace) do allow you to update the manuscript after publication.
If you are not confident of your quality control process, you might want to look into a distribution method which allows you to update the manuscript after publication date.
Frankly I worry more about typos than about inconsistent punctuation because one typo lowers a reader's confidence about the book's quality.
Also, technical books and manuals have to undergo additional vetting from an editor who does technical review-- because a mistake can result in bad information. At the same time, all technical publishers know that errata will occur and often have a web page on the company site listing issues and corrections.
A typical developer buys a programming book with the near certainty that it will usually contain technical errors. But they don't sweat it as much because it will help them with general concepts, and generally they can spot the error -- even though it may not run properly. The typical developer wouldn't mind an occasional misspelled word as long as the code works or the technical knowledge is basically right. Also, many IT books are out-of-date by the time they are published, making it all the more important to check for errata.
If it's okay with Stephen King, it's okay with me. I have proofread my book no less than ten times and I still find errors. I'm not perfect and neither is anyone else. I feel confident that most readers don't judge a book by its typos.
Errors abound in everything from Stephen King novels to The LA Times. Daily newpapers get sort-of a pass from me, because they are on tight deadlines, but still it drives me nuts seeing errors in the 'A' section every time I read it. With books, there should be -
more editors
more time
multiple editions
This makes prose, style, spelling, grammatical and clarity-type mistakes harder for me to swallow. Maybe it's because I have some form of OCD and I catch errors w/o looking for them.
to answer - the number of acceptable mistakes is zero. Pro musicians are expected to sight-read at a 100 percent proficiency. That means; it has to be perfect the first time else--> get fired. In Process Improvement we identify action(s) that drag "on-time-delivery" (usually of widgets), We call it a finished-project once we deliver 'dem widgets on-time & error-free over 98.5 percent of the time. Only in baseball is it ok for pros to accomplish their main function less than 30 percent of the time.
With self publishing these days, errors are inevitable. I wouldn't mind too much to 3 or 4 errors as long as the flow is there. Anyway that is me. I am an author as well but even after reading my books over and over many times, it was disappointing to find errors.
No errors are acceptable, period.
If I were to write out three paragraphs of text on here, I would check each paragraph for errors until I was satisfied they were all correct before I clicked the 'Post Your Answer' button. If I found errors, I would not be satisfied with what I'd written until it was correct.
Why would a 400 page book be any different? As far as I'm concerned it isn't.
However, living in the real world and being the pragmatists we are sometimes compromises need (and have) to be made.
How much money are you prepared to spend on proof reading those 400 pages over and over and over and over again to ensure there isn't one single error left? Because you can do that if that's what you're prepared to do. However, for most people, business people, writers, publishers etc that simply isn't financially viable.
You have to draw a line somewhere and accept that given your budget for publishing that 400 page book you cannot spend all your money on proofreading and for the project to be financially viable you will have to accept that some errors will slip through the net.
So what it really comes down to is a cost v error acceptability rate. What that rate will be will almost always come down to how much money you're prepared to spend on it and the quality of the people you spend it on.
You're 'worried you haven't done your job', as far as I'm concerned just getting the 400 page book published means you've 'done your job'! If it contains any errors, log them and correct them on the next reprint!
Some errors will always remain, no matter how many proofreaders go through the manuscript. I've yet to see an error-free book.
Some readers will always be critical. If it's not the proofreading, it's the editing. If it's not that, it's the fact-checking, and so on. Just steel yourself for the critics, and hope they find happier ways to amuse themselves, soon.
I'm not sure there's any "error rate" to share with you. A single-letter error -- leaving an "s" off a plural, for example -- isn't the same as using an entirely incorrect word (accept, except), and some errors are more glaring than others.
A book that's been hastily proofread by just one proofreader may display 1 typo per 1,000 words. In my opinion, that's too many, but it's not unusual among published books I've been sent to read and review. I'm more comfortable with 3 typos (single-letter errors or two letters, transposed) per 10,000 words.
Terms of Use Privacy policy Contact About Cancellation policy © selfpublishingguru.com2024 All Rights reserved.