Bad citations
Posted: 30 May 2017 08:21 AM   [ Ignore ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1404
Joined  2007-04-28

What is going on with the first three citations here? It looks like a bot has been badly programmed to auto-correct what it’s looking for. The sources are reputable. All the other citations are fine. Deprivation is the more common word so it would be more likely that depravation was auto-changed to deprivation under that entry. The spellchecker WO.org uses doesn’t recognise depravation (or my spelling of recognise).

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 May 2017 11:50 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6324
Joined  2007-01-03

The first one is a typo in the original Washington Post article. I can’t find the second one on the NY Times website, and I don’t have access to the Time archives.

My guess is, if the latter two are actual citations, they were typos in the original too. But whoever selected these citations, be they human or bot, did a poor job.

Profile