What Not to Write – parts 21 to 25

Here’s another compilation of tips I sometimes post on LinkedIn about pitfalls to avoid in your writing, with the hashtag #WhatNotToWrite, features numbers 21 to 25 in the never-ending series.
 
The tips are mainly geared towards business writing, and based on things I’ve noticed when editing business-oriented content, though some are also worth bearing in mind for other types of writing.
 
You can find the earlier compilations by following these links: 1–5, 6–10, 11–15, 16–20.

---

2️⃣1️⃣ Don’t write ‘upon’ or ‘within’ when a plain old ‘on’ or ‘in’ would do.
 
Like this:
❌ The tests are based upon the study notes within this course.
 
Try this instead:
✔ The tests are based on the study notes in this course.
 
It’s shorter and snappier, and gives the reader less work to do. It may not seem like a big difference – but this is only one sentence, and if you use the more bloated wording over and over again, it may well start to get on the reader’s nerves.
 
‘Upon’ is basically just a more formal version of ‘on’. But even in a fairly formal context, like a business document, readability matters. And I doubt that the word ‘on’ would stop anybody in their tracks and make them think ‘Ooh, that’s a bit informal!’
 
In contrast, ‘within’ and ‘in’ have different meanings, though there is some overlap (it’s too much to explain here).  Sometimes ‘within’ is the more suitable word, so you should use it. But if either word would do, why not keep things simple and use ‘in’?
 
The usual principle applies here: think of the reader.
 
On LinkedIn

---

2️⃣2️⃣  Don’t write ‘Read on’. Simple as that. Here’s the kind of thing I mean:

❌ Have you wondered how you can use LinkedIn to boost your sales? Read on to find out …
❌ We’ve made a great addition to our product range! Read on to learn about it.

I’m going to stick my neck out here and say that this NEVER looks good. It just isn’t the kind of thing you’re likely to see in professional (or professionally edited) writing.

OK, I can’t quite pinpoint why it’s so off-putting, but it may be the whiff of desperation: it seems that you’re so worried about the reader losing interest, you have to instruct them to carry on reading. There has to be a better way to keep them engaged.

I won’t offer a one-size-fits-all alternative, as it depends on the context, but the first solution to consider is to simply leave it out and not use anything in its place. Just try that and see whether it works – there’s a good chance that it will. As usual: think of the reader and how they’re likely to react.
 
On LinkedIn

---

2️⃣3️⃣ Don’t write a capital ‘M’ or ‘B’ when expressing a figure in millions or billions.

I seem to have noticed this kind of thing a lot recently:
❌ 10 Million people
❌ £1M
❌ $4 Billion
❌ €80Bn

These are just numbers, not names, so lower case is the way to go, like this:
✅ 10 million people
✅ £1m
✅ $4 billion
✅ €80bn
 
The same applies to trillions and so on, if you happen to be going that high, but I don’t want this post to go on forever.
 
Overuse of capitals is a common flaw in business writing and marketing content. Keeping their use to a minimum will help to make your writing look professional and credible. (There are all sorts of other ways as well, which is where an editor or proofreader can help you – hint, hint 😏)
 
On LinkedIn

---

2️⃣4️⃣ Don’t write a sentence that has a dangling ‘from’. A what?

Here’s the kind of thing I mean, and I do see it fairly often:
❌ We offer a range of services from warehousing, distribution, customs clearance and freight management.
 
See the problem? The ‘from’ needs to match up with a ‘to’ somewhere further along, otherwise it’s meaningless. The reader may well start looking for a ‘to’, and lose focus on what the sentence is supposed to be telling them.

Also, this ‘from-to’ structure only really works with things that are at or near opposite ends of a spectrum: small to large, local to global, simple to complex and so on.

So, if you use a ‘to’ somewhere in the above example, it still won’t seem quite right, as there won’t be an obvious contrast between the services before and after it. It would be better to use something like ‘including’ instead of ‘from’, and perhaps ‘variety’ instead of ‘range’.

Here's an example where it does work:
✅ We have a wide range of properties to let, from studio apartments to luxury villas.
 
So, now you know how to avoid a dangling ‘from’. (That’s what I’ve decided to call it, anyway. Don’t bother researching it on Google – you’re not likely to find anything relevant …)
 
On LinkedIn

---

2️⃣5️⃣ Don’t write ‘Table of contents’ as the heading for your table of contents.

Your reader can already see that it’s a table (or is it a list? 🤔) – you don’t need to hammer the point home by telling them. I mean, you’re not likely to see a heading such as ‘List of references’ or ‘Series of paragraphs about the background to this report’.

Just ‘Contents’ will do nicely by itself – that will tell the reader all they need to know.
 
On LinkedIn