Archive for the ‘Editing’ Category


Changes to Australian federal government departments

July 11, 2022

With each change of state and federal government after an election (particularly when the other party wins the election), invariably departments are amalgamated, added, disbanded, or functions from one department now come under another, and/or department names are changed. For the government departments related to the areas I work in (environment, water, energy, agriculture, in particular), the list below details the changes to the Australian government departments as at 1 July 2022:

  • Former Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment (DAWE) ==> split into Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW) and Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF)
  • Former Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources (DISER) ==> becomes Department of Industry, Science and Resources (DISR); the Energy function goes to DCCEEW
  • (new) Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR; not to be confused with the old DEWR abbreviation used for the former Department of Environment and Water Resources)
  • Former Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communication (DITRDC) ==> becomes Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communication and the Arts (DITRDCA)




Comprehensive list of courses related to editing

July 10, 2022

Katharine O’Moore-Klopf has compiled a very comprehensive list of courses related to editing (and sometimes publishing too) on her website. The courses include formal undergrad and postgrad courses from universities, as well as programs from professional associations and the like. If you’re interested in getting specific training in editing, her page is a great place to start:

She also has some excellent resources related to copyediting, starting here:

[Link last checked July 2022]


Dealing with references and author-date citations: Advice for authors

June 15, 2022

Sue Littleford, from Apt Words in the UK, has some great advice for authors when preparing citations and references, prior to sending the document to your copyeditor. By following her steps in this PDF ( you’ll save time and money, and save a lot of frustration and queries from your copyeditor!

As an example, I recently edited a 400p document, which had about 10p of references (about 2.5% of the total pages). Just formatting the reference list alone to conform to the corporate style took me well over 4 hours, plus a similar amount of time to verify that the reference information was correct (checking authors, dates, journal titles, volume/issue and page numbers, URLs etc.). Those 10p took more than 10% of my time—time I charge for by the hour. Checking and formatting references is tedious work, and I’d rather forgo the extra dollars than have to deal with a messy one. If authors, who are familiar with what they’re writing and the sources they’ve used, got those citations/refs in good shape before handing the document to the copyeditor, I for one would be very happy!

Hint: Sue suggests printing out the reference list for checking against the citations. I don’t do that when I’m copyediting—instead, I copy the refs list into a new document, highlight the lot, and put it on my other monitor. As I find each citation, I check there’s an entry for it and if so, remove the highlight for that one. Those with highlights remaining have not been cited, but I do a quick search of the document just to make sure. (Details of my method:

[Links last checked June 2022]


Do I need a style guide?

October 17, 2021

A client recently asked me if they should have a corporate style guide and whether I could help them with that. They’re a small consulting company, with probably fewer than 30 employees. They write a LOT of reports.

Below is a summary of my response to them.


I strongly recommend that every company of more than a few people has an in-house style guide, especially if they’re doing a lot of writing. Plus a standard dictionary they use for general terms, and possibly a specialist dictionary for terms used in their industry. Together, these save you from answering questions all the time about whether certain terms are hyphenated or capped, whether to use indents (not for business writing), double spaces (never!), etc. The ‘I’ve always done it like this because my Year 5 teacher told me so’ method of writing for corporate reports etc. is NOT a valid style guide. Times change, language changes, and there’s a good chance the Year 5 teacher got the ‘rule’ from their Year 5 teacher, who got the rule from their Year 5 teacher and so on.

Most in-house style guides are based on an official published style guide, either for the industry, a professional body, or for a publication (e.g. in the US, they mainly use the Chicago Manual of Style or AP for general works). Most style guides will list the dictionary that they base spellings, hyphenation etc. on. In Australia, that’s typically the Macquarie Dictionary, and I would suggest that you take out an annual online subscription to it—it’s pretty cheap, and you don’t have to have the very weighty tome on your desks. I use my Macquarie subscription EVERY day; if it was the hard copy, I’d rarely open it. (

In Australia, we have the Australian (government) Style Manual (ASM) that many corporate/industry/professional style guides are based on—it’s available for free online and was recently (2020) updated from the previous printed edition (2002): There’s also AMOS, which focuses mainly on scientific writing (I’m not a subscriber to AMOS so I don’t know much more about it). AMOS helpfully lists where their guide differs from the ASM:

I’ve created a style guide for [name of corporation]’s health, safety, and environment documents (not shared for client confidentiality reasons). For other clients, I use their in-house style guide for the documents I edit for them. In addition, for some clients I also create a style sheet to go with their edited document that details the choices I made for THAT document that aren’t covered by the style guide. NOTE: A style sheet is specific to a SINGLE document, whereas a style guide applies to ALL documents produced (for example, the style guide might say no apostrophes in geographic names and give a couple of examples, but the style sheet might list all the geographic names used in that document).

It takes a while (several months on and off) to develop a style guide and there’s a lot of back and forth between those involved to nut out and come to agreement on what ‘rules’ you want to enforce (remember, there are no real rules, just traditions and conventions—it’s a guide, not something set in stone). There should only be ONE point of contact in the company for whoever develops your style guide. That contact person discusses style guide issues in meetings with others in the company and relays the decisions back to the person developing the style guide. Be warned—discussions can get HEATED!* (yes, I’ve been there, done that!) And you’ll be surprised how passionate some people are about commas, dashes, and semicolons! And spaces… (all those rules from the various Year 5 teachers over various generations and education systems will come spilling out).

You also need to decide whether you want your style guide to be fully searchable online (as per the ASM), or a printed guide (e.g. PDF) available online. If fully online, that adds another (expensive) layer to the mix as the website for it has to have full text search capabilities and a navigable table of contents.

So, short answer – yes, I can help you develop a style guide, but you have to do a lot of groundwork at your end before you start thinking about producing a document. You need to decide:

  • what has to go in it (I’d recommend only variations from the standard ASM, for example; for scope, use the table of contents from the examples I’ve attached as a guide [not attached to this blog post, of course])
  • what your corporate (not personal) decision is on all these things, then start noting those decisions for whoever prepares your style guide.

Once you send your notes and decisions to whoever is developing the style guide, they’ll come back to with lots of ‘what about?’ scenarios that you’ll need to make further decisions on. You can save yourself a lot of time and therefore money by sticking to a standard style guide and ONLY using a in-house guide for exceptions/variations or to summarise what’s in the standard style guide.


Further to this, many style guides, especially those from professional bodies, may include a list of terms and how to write them. In mining/resources/geology, do you write ‘down hole’, ‘down-hole’, or downhole’, and does the word form vary depending on whether you’re using the term as an adjective or a noun? (for an example of a terms list like this, see p50 onwards of the Society of Petroleum Engineers Style Guide: Having a list like this in a style guide, or as an appendix to it, saves a LOT of time for those who are doing the writing, whether they are experienced writers, or just new to the company or industry.

* Some 15 years ago I was working as a technical writer for a software company. They had several programs that they’d developed and were about to start marketing, but there was NO consistency in how they named one particular program. Let’s call it ‘Jet Forms’ — was it ‘Jet Forms’, ‘JetForms’, ‘Jetforms’, ‘Jet-forms’, ‘Jet-Forms’, ‘jetForms’, or any other variation on this? Between the marketing people and the developers and the website content people, I saw almost every variation you could imagine for just this one product name! I raised the inconsistency in a meeting as I had to document this product and thus use the name hundreds of times, and said we HAD to make a firm decision on what to call it so that EVERYONE used the same term to avoid confusing our customers. We had 8 people in that meeting (2 of whom were the owners of the company), and I couldn’t believe they spent an hour discussing it! It cost the company 8 hours of wages while we haggled over a single word. And no, some 15 years on, I can’t recall what they decided, but I certainly recall the long discussion that was a waste of time and money when just one of the owners should have said, ‘It’s xxx’, and we’d have been done.


Best. Unsolicited. Testimonial. Ever

October 11, 2021

One of my geology clients wrote a LinkedIn article that both praised me enthusiastically AND promoted the use of editors (October 2021). The article is here: What to do when the write right words won’t come out, and a PDF of it is saved here.

Two other clients also added their praises for my work in their comments for that LinkedIn article; my client had referred me to both of them in the past year:

  • We worked with Rhonda Bracey on a major project in the past year and had a fabulous experience – we all agreed that having a professional editor was worth the additional cost. (JL, Canada, minerals exploration company)
  • Rhonda is a godsend Jun! I’m so grateful you put me onto her! This article is great; shows everyone they CAN share their ideas and contribute to our science, even if they lack the confidence in writing to do so – they just need to source the right help! Love it (MH, Perth, structural geologist)

Yes, I blushed! But I think I might be able to put that imposter syndrome to bed now.


List of tasks done by technical editors

June 19, 2021

One of this blog’s readers alerted me to this list of tasks that technical editors do, written in late 2020 by Yoel Strimling: Not all technical editors will do all tasks, and no doubt some could add other tasks, but I thought this list gave a concise overview of the tasks we undertake when editing a piece of technical writing, along with approximate times for each stage.

In the same vein, I have a ‘triage list’ of editing tasks that I can do for clients—I ask new clients or those who have a limited budget and/or timeframe to use this to direct me as to the highest priority things they want done to their document: As a perfectionist, my tendency is to do it all, but if you’ve only given me xx hours to edit a nnn-page technical document, then you need to be prepared to tell me what to focus on, because I’m not a superhero.

[Links last checked June 2021]


Harmful language

May 3, 2021

This Tweet from Crystal Shelley (@redpenrabbit) resonated with me:

When editors speak up about harmful language, we give writers the information and power to make a decision: change the writing or leave it as is.

When we’re silent, it harms writers and readers. We take away that choice and guarantee that the harmful writing stays.



Good article on the differences between line and copy editing

January 12, 2021

Based on the definitions Jane Friedman uses in her article (, my editing involves a blend of line and copy editing, with some Word formatting magic thrown in, if required by the client. I don’t do proofreading, developmental editing, or substantive editing. NOTE: Her examples include some from fiction, whereas I only edit factual materials (typically corporate/business/government reports and other written communication). And she uses CMOS as her main style guide, whereas I use the Australian Government Style Manual for works for an Australian audience (

The list of the things I include in an edit vary according to what the client wants—I offer clients my ‘triage list’ of editing tasks from which they can choose:

[Links last checked January 2021]





Definition of technical editing

December 30, 2020

An editing colleague posted a link to an article by Tom Lang on technical editing and the tasks and thought processes involved, with some excellent examples:

In the article, he cited a thesis by Natalie Peterson that lists some 410 (!) technical editing tasks. So I went hunting down rabbit holes for the thesis, and finally found it. Not only does it list and categorise those 410 editing tasks (in Appendices 1 and 2), but Peterson also offers a new definition of technical editing that resonated with me:

Technical editing is the suggestion of improvements to a document or other communication product to help an author increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the transmission of information in a specialized subject to the author’s intended audience.

(Peterson, Natalie L, Revising Theory: A Universal Framework for the Comprehensive Editing of Technical Communications, 2017, Masters Thesis, University of Wisconsin-Stout; available from:


What an editor does

September 29, 2020

Spotted in a Facebook editors’ group, with no attribution, unfortunately. Thanks to the person who put this together. My daily work life is definitely the bottom right image!

What my friends think I do: image of Words with Friends game; What my Mom things I do: image of a person with glasses in business attire marking up a piece of paper they're holding; What writers think I do: image of an angry person ripping up paper; What society thinks I do: image of a McDonalds 'Drive Thru' sign changed to 'Drive Through'; What I really do: image of a heavily marked up Word document with track changes and comments visible