SA - help me understand workflow of rejection reasons
I submitted my first article on October 2nd and got a first rejection the day after for "Intended purpose of phrase is purely to obtain a link".
I amended the incriminated link and resubmitted but got another rejection, this time on a "reference" term not allowed within the content. My first thought was, why the heck they didn't tell me about this in first rejection (term was already present within initial submission)?
Got a third rejection today, again for a third different reason: "Article does not make sense and will not benefit the end user."
If the article "....does not make sense...", why do I have to wait a third rejection (and a full week) instead of being told of ALL incongruities within my article at the same time?
I am not an expert at writing articles but I started submitting to other article directories which, I noticed, notifies rejection reasons all at once which, from my point of view, makes far more sense for both author and article directory staff.
Recent Comments
6
Don't get discouraged. Try reading accepted articles and even retype some to get the feel of how they are organized and written. Talk to the reader and put off your desire to market as you write. If you can state a problem, solve the problem and then give some encouragement at the end your article will be more interesting. Then, go back and edit the article and try to incorporate more keywords. Eventually, you will develop a format for your articles and a style of writing that comes more naturally to you. If you'd like to send me one of your articles I can give you some more specific advice. Good luck!
Thanks Colin for your kind contribution.
Perhaps my complaint is rather for the method than for the substance of rejection reasons, which I don't want to question.
Receiving rejections for three separate issues at three different timings sounds rather illogical, and frankly a waste of time for everybody, authors and SA staff.
That is what I wanted to highlight with my blog post
I agree with what you have said and it might be worth sending Kyle or Carson a PM about this as it would make utter sense to address all problems in one Go. This approach is totally reactive with no proactive inclusions - your article rejection for 3 attempts makes the work load 8 times ineffective ie you have to resubmit 4 times and the Article ctritic has to review the artcle 4 times as well.
I'm not entirely sure how SA reviews articles but it does take a few rejects to understand what is wanted or at least accepted.I experienced this on my first Article.The best thing to do is let another member review your article and they can usually spot the error - Beverley is good at this but if she is tied up I can see if I can help. - Colin
I think I have gotten every rejection you can imagine, lol. If you want, i can help review too.
See more comments
Thanks to all of you for your contribution.
I want to stress once more that my observations are not about the rejection reasons themselves but rather about the (odd) method of reviewing articles.
Meanwhile, since I couldn't wait any longer (and didnd't want to risk a fourth different rejection...), I moved the article, as is, at Hubpages where, with no need for amendments, it has been accepted and published in a 24 hours time span, and moreover I was able to add images!
Squidoo also reviewed and published another article of mine in about 24 hours, and I'm waiting from Ezine where I submitted a third article 2 days ago.
I will try again with SA of course but, given also that it ranks worse than the directories I just cited and doesn't allow your own images, I am not going to be that much patient .