Find inconsistent writing conventions: British vs American spelling mix, number formatting (1,000 vs 1.000), capitalization, date formats, and hyphenated terms used both ways.
Built and maintained by Paul Clark, Redmoon Software
Use as a final-pass check before submitting. Particularly useful when multiple authors have contributed.
Style guides (Chicago, AP, MLA) cover many more rules. This tool is the quick mechanical check; full style enforcement needs an editor.
The checker scans for ~35 of the most common British/American spelling pairs and flags any text that contains both spellings (or only the wrong-locale spelling).
It also looks for mixed number formatting (1,000 vs 1.000 vs 1 000), mixed date formats, hyphenation variants ("e-mail" vs "email"), and words capitalized inconsistently.
Use US or UK locale selectors to decide which spelling family should be considered the canonical one.
British vs. American spelling mix, mixed number formats (1,000 vs 1.000), inconsistent capitalization, hyphenation (email vs e-mail), and mixed date formats.
No — it surfaces them. Fixing manually keeps you in control of style.
About 35 of the most-common UK/US pairs. We deliberately skip rare or context-dependent pairs.
Input
The colour scheme was finalized in our last meeting. We will analyze the colors and submit feedback by 31/12/2025.
Output
2 issues — UK/US spelling mix; mixed date format.
"Colour" is British, "colors" and "analyze" are American — the text mixes both. Dates use DD/MM/YYYY, which is fine alone, but if the rest of the document uses ISO, that's an inconsistency.
This checks for the same thing written more than one way in a single document: British against American spelling, hyphenation that changes between instances, serial commas used sometimes, capitalisation of the same term that varies, and number formatting that switches between words and digits.
None of these is an error in isolation — both spellings of "organise" are correct, and both are defensible house style. Mixing them within one document is the defect, because it signals that nobody read the whole thing.
Inconsistency degrades trust below the level of conscious attention. A reader who sees "e-mail" and "email" on the same page rarely stops to identify it, but their confidence in the document drops. That effect is disproportionate to how trivial each instance is, which is what makes an automated pass worthwhile.
The most common source is text assembled from several authors or pasted from other documents, which is exactly when nobody has read the result end to end. Run this last, after the content is settled, since editing reintroduces variants.
% content words vs. function words.
Text analysisVocabulary variety — type‑token ratio.
Text analysisTotal + per‑word syllable counts.
Text analysisHighlight passive sentences in your writing.