Beauty and inner beauty Beauty and inner beauty

Yesterday I corrected an article in langcorrect website which named “beauty and inner beauty.” The author thought beauty is more important than other qualities in these days. Yesterday I corrected an article in langcorrect website named “beauty and inner beauty.” The author thought beauty is more important than other qualities in these days.

I'm assuming that the name of the article was "beauty and inner beauty." The "which" makes it sound to me like the article did the naming.

Yesterday I corrected an article ion langcorrect website which nam.com which was called “beauty and inner beauty.” The author thought beauty is more important than other qualities in these days. Yesterday I corrected an article on langcorrect.com which was called “beauty and inner beauty.” The author thought beauty is more important than other qualities these days.

Because beautiful creatures can get more opportunities and occupy the possibilities of success. Because beautiful creatures can get more opportunities and occupy the possibilities of success.

This sentence would feel better to me if just connected to the previous with a comma.

BThey thought beauty is more important because beautiful creatures can get more opportunities and occupy the possibilities ofchances for success. They thought beauty is more important because beautiful creatures can get more opportunities and chances for success.

I am not denying that beauty is a great quality that may guide you to success. I am not denying that beauty is a great quality that may guide you to success.

But that doesn’t mean beauty is the most powerful quality in the world. But that doesn’t mean beauty is the most powerful quality in the world.

Again, conjunctions should often, stylistically at least, be merged with the previous sentence because they complete the thought.

SBeauty is the same as other qualities, such as honesty, consistency, foresight and so on, d. Different qualities have different applicable scenarios. Beauty is the same as other qualities, such as honesty, consistency, foresight and so on. Different qualities have different applicable scenarios.

If you want to be an actor or actress, beauty is a basic and, if not the most important quality you must have. If you want to be an actor or actress, beauty is a basic, if not the most important quality you must have.

If you want to be a wife married to a rich man, your beauty may help you increase the possirobability. If you want to be a wife married to a rich man, your beauty may help you increase the probability.

Possibility if generally a binary "is or isn't", so you generally won't say something is "more possible" but "more probable."

However, if you are a boss who wants to promote a CFO(the cChief fFinancial oOfficer), which one would you consider? However, if you are a boss who wants to promote a CFO(Chief Financial Officer), which one would you consider?

However, if you are a boss who wants to promote a CFO (the chief financial officer), which one would you consider? However, if you are a boss who wants to promote a CFO (the chief financial officer), which one would you consider?

The beautiful one or the honesty one? The beautiful one or the honest one?

The beautiful one or the honesty one? The beautiful one or the honest one?

In Chinese contemporary economics history, the top 10 richest people such as MaYun, WangXing.eg, who get, etc., who attain such a great achievements aren’, it isn't because of their beauty, but benefiting from their foresights and consistency. In Chinese contemporary economics history, the top 10 richest people such as MaYun, WangXing, etc., who attain such a great achievements, it isn't because of their beauty, but their foresights and consistency.

get -> be given, come by, acquire by any means attain -> succeed in getting, generally by one's own efforts aren't -> comma + it isn't: The subject of the first clause is "the top 10 richest people" and so "aren't" doesn't make sense to me. They aren't what? However the "it" in my suggestion I think is more like setting "the reason they were able to achieve that" as the subject.

In Chinese contemporary economics history, the top 10 richest people, such as MaYun, WangXing.eg, who getmade such a great achievements aren’not because of their beauty, but benefiting fromcause of their foresights and consistency. In Chinese contemporary economics history, the top 10 richest people, such as MaYun, WangXing.eg, made such great achievements not because of their beauty, but because of their foresight and consistency.

You may excuse(?) that if two people reach the same level in other qualities, you will choose the beautiful one. You may excuse(?) that if two people reach the same level in other qualities, you will choose the beautiful one.

I can't change "excuse" without changing the meaning of the sentence... maybe it's supposed to be "You may believe that"?

This would not overthrowutweigh the point that beauty is one of the great qualities, putting other qualities instead of beauty into your sentenceargument will also make sense. This would not outweigh the point that beauty is one of the great qualities, putting other qualities instead of beauty into your argument will also make sense.

You overthrow empires and governments. Pros and cons or arguments can outweigh each other. sentence -> argument: "Sentence" felt kind of vague to me here so I took a guess. I hope the meaning didn't change.

This would not overthrowgo against the point that beauty is one of the great qualities, p. Putting other qualities instead of beauty into your sentence will also make sense. This would not go against the point that beauty is one of the great qualities. Putting other qualities instead of beauty into your sentence will also make sense.

You also may excuseaccept that inner beauty qualities can’t easily be seen. You also may accept that inner beauty qualities can’t easily be seen.

My dear, success wouldn’ill not come out at the first sight. My dear, success will not come out at the first sight.

And just because the inner beauty is stoo hard to be seen, so once it is seen, the one with those qualities becomes more reliable. And just because the inner beauty is too hard to be seen, once it is seen, the one with those qualities becomes more reliable.

And just because the inner beauty is so hard to be seen, sothat once it is seen, the one with those qualities becomes more reliable. And just because inner beauty is so hard to be seen, that once it is seen, the one with those qualities becomes more reliable.

I fileel so pitiful withfor the author. I feel so pitiful for the author.

Alternate correction: I am filled with pity for the author The original wording was unclear, but "with" made me feel like you were commiserating with them, though that didn't make sense to me. "for" is a hard word to explain, but I feel it's natural here. Again, I hope I got the meaning right.

I fileel souch pitiful withy for the author. I feel such pity for the author.

I wasn't entirely sure what was meant here, so this was my best guess.

So many great femaleswomen devoted themselves to reach the equality of men and women, but you still think beauty is the most important thing, which have advantages over other inner qualities only in marriage! So many great women devoted themselves to reach the equality of men and women, but you still think beauty is the most important thing, which have advantages over other inner qualities only in marriage!

females -> women: "male" and "female" refer to biological sex and anatomy so they tend to be used less frequently as it can be slightly objectifying. That said, there are some American subcultures where "females" is more respectful than other terms.

So many great femaleswomen devoted themselves to reach the equality of men and women, but you still think beauty is the most important thing, which haves advantages over other inner qualities only in marriage! So many great women devoted themselves to reach the equality of men and women, but you still think beauty is the most important thing, which has advantages over other inner qualities only in marriage!