🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4plhgq$of1@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, ik@uihepa.hep.uiuc.edu writes:
|> In article <4pl3eg$5om@abel.cc.sunysb.edu>, dkat@psych1.psy.sunysb.edu (DK)
|> writes: 
|> >
|> \/   serious 
|> /\		snipping
|> 
|> > My favorite story on
|> >big goofs was the editor that went through a scientific paper and
|> >changed  all of the "significant at" the such and such level to
|> >"important at" the X level.  DK
|> >
|> my favorite story is from the times before Gorbachev etc when, 
|> in my native Poland, the censor changed every !! to ! in a math
|> book. too much emphasis...
|> 
|> 

My favourite story (though I did not find it funny then) happened to me
last year. A french editor managed to introduce grammatical errors, as 
well as changing the sense of some sentences by substituting words he did
not know by words he did know, into an english text which before was perfectly 
correct (we had a native speaker go over it before submitting it). He (or she)
didn't even bother to notify us of the changes made, we found out when we got
the galley proofs and there was a mistake in every third sentence. So we 
changed everything back, wrote them an angry letter, and they really managed
to get it right again and still publish the paper on time. 

Recently, I saw a paper in the same journal containing mistakes (of grammar)
which I did not notice in the preprint I had of it - sounds like the same
editor.... Just to warn any physicists out there - the journal in question
was J. Phys. (France).

Sabine