Quality of "editorial review"
Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2011 1:10 pm
I'm new here, and am still waiting for my first article to be accepted. I submitted it and
it was rejected, allegedly because it wasn't in a 12-point font (it was), and because the
summary wasn't separated from the body appropriately (I followed an example on the site).
That first rejection took over a week, and the second submission has yet to be responded to,
after nearly a week. In my frustration, I've been looking around the site and wonder whether
I can write to the standards required here. As an example, I looked at the page in the FAQ titled
"HOW CAN I FIND WHAT I AM LOOKING FOR", and found ten (count 'em!) errors which I wouldn't
include in my writing. They range from inconsistent capitalization (in the name Constant-Content,
no less) to clear typos (phase instead of phrase), to a THEN where a THAN should be. The use of
commas is pretty poor, too. My observation suggests that this page is not atypical.
My question is this: When someone buys an article from the site, what should he reasonably assume
about its quality? Grammatical perfection? Passed a spelling check (we know how little that means...)?
Would get an A if graded by a 7th grade English teacher? Facts checked? No need for the purchaser to
review it?
I should acknowledge that when I signed up for this site, I thought the first article was subject to review
(perfectly reasonable), but didn't understand that EVERY article was subject to delay and review. I think
I may have to find another way to get my work out.
If anyone reading this wants to check out my complaint, the offending page is at
http://www.constant-content.com/about/H ... ng-For.htm
Best, Tom
it was rejected, allegedly because it wasn't in a 12-point font (it was), and because the
summary wasn't separated from the body appropriately (I followed an example on the site).
That first rejection took over a week, and the second submission has yet to be responded to,
after nearly a week. In my frustration, I've been looking around the site and wonder whether
I can write to the standards required here. As an example, I looked at the page in the FAQ titled
"HOW CAN I FIND WHAT I AM LOOKING FOR", and found ten (count 'em!) errors which I wouldn't
include in my writing. They range from inconsistent capitalization (in the name Constant-Content,
no less) to clear typos (phase instead of phrase), to a THEN where a THAN should be. The use of
commas is pretty poor, too. My observation suggests that this page is not atypical.
My question is this: When someone buys an article from the site, what should he reasonably assume
about its quality? Grammatical perfection? Passed a spelling check (we know how little that means...)?
Would get an A if graded by a 7th grade English teacher? Facts checked? No need for the purchaser to
review it?
I should acknowledge that when I signed up for this site, I thought the first article was subject to review
(perfectly reasonable), but didn't understand that EVERY article was subject to delay and review. I think
I may have to find another way to get my work out.
If anyone reading this wants to check out my complaint, the offending page is at
http://www.constant-content.com/about/H ... ng-For.htm
Best, Tom