Re: resume fondling -- am I being too picky?
1) Run-on sentences, especially in the objective/summary section.
Generally bad, but you can see where it comes from. There's popular résumé guidance limiting an 'Objective' to one sentence. Résumé writing is awkward for everyone; the applicant may be stressed by the hunt and trying new things. Forgivable if it doesn't occur elsewhere. +/-0, with qualification.
2) Incorrect capitalization of the tools the candidate has said
they've used. For example, "Framemaker."
I use manufacturer's/publisher's capitalization, even interCaps (bumpy caps, whatever), and verify source coinage. Others feel it's marketing crap and alter capitalization on purpose, thinking they've done a service. Again, I disagree, but it's possible you'd eliminate someone who had reasons.
Then again, conscious alteration is too damned fussy. -1
[Ahem. Inconsistent number in T.W. Smith's nominal, #2 above. (candidate/said/they)]
3) Everything tagged Normal. Or, a hodge-podge of style use. (Which is
why I prefer to receive Word files; I look at the structure of the
content in the resume and style use and evaluate the author based on
Can't imagine that applicants submitting Word files don't know warts will show if they're careless -- including folks who don't use Word regularly. Even if the techcomm work is done in Frame (or other) and not Word, I've never seen a workplace where you don't have to interact in Word often.
That means every Word doc exchanged between this techcomm and the organization is a missed opportunity to evangelize proper style and styling, or implies disregard. In everything we do, we teach a little. -1
4) Failure to indicate which tools were used at which jobs.
Sorry, too picky. -1 for T.W. Smith ;)
5) Failure to indicate size of documentation projects at various jobs;
was it a long doc or short one? (I can infer some of this from the
tools used, PPT for example would cause me to believe the doc was
short, but I cannot infer that a user guide is either short or long.)
This harks to the #4 response above, and an arc. If you like what you see, give the interview and sort it out. That said, in-person questioning on any nit is legit.
6) Oddly inconsistent case. For example, "I wrote User Guides and
online help"; I find it odd that User Guides and help differ in case.
7) Ambiguous employment descriptions anf an odd mix of sentences and
non-sentences in employment descriptions.
General résumé filter.
8) Poor font choice, manual kerning changes, that combined with
run-ons (1.) makes the resume hard to read.
General filter. Over-emphasis on DTP is probably not what you want. Poor DTP decisions are nevertheless poor. -2
[Comma and 'that' usage by T.W. Smith (not her real name) in #8 passage above doesn't pass muster.]
9) Failure to embed fonts in PDFs.
Thought this was about MS Word. If not, -1.
I prefer full i18n embedding, Cyrillic, Simplified Chinese and Sanskrit especially. And definitely Wapner. Is there a hyphen in 'definitely Wapner'?
10) Document properties that list an author other than the candidate.
Tougher. On the general rule that pros should know a Word file shows their underwear, -1.
WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT - EDIT AND REVIEW, REDEFINED
Accelerate the document lifecycle with full online discussions and unique feedback-management capabilities. Unlimited, efficient reviews for Word
and FrameMaker authors. Live, online demo:
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
resume fondling -- am I being too picky?: From: T.W. Smith
Previous by Author:
Re: Click or Click on vs. Press
Next by Author: Re: watch your language! (or don't)
Previous by Thread: Re: resume fondling -- am I being too picky?
Next by Thread: resume fondling -- am I being too picky?
Search our Technical Writing Archives & Magazine