Constant Content

I received a rejection for an article with 27 tips. It had an introduction and conclusion. Each point on the list was one to two sentences; it wasn't simply a laundry list of words. Similar articles I've written for publications have been among their top performers.

The editorial note is: "If you wish to create a list of tips, steps, or items, each list item must be accompanied by an explanation. We cannot accept submissions that are simply lists."

Why aren't lists accepted when this is what readers want? Inc Magazine just sent their contributors the top 10 articles of 2013 and 9 of them are numbered lists. They're easy to sell because bloggers know audiences love them.

Is this a policy that can be reconsidered? It doesn't make much sense that the most popular article format on the web right now is one we aren't allowed to sell here.

OMG WordUp are you the same WordUp I know? M?

Hit me up if you want to ask me in Gchat.

My most recent list submission had two paragraphs for every item on the list and got the rejection "paragraphs must stand alone from their subtitles." But said nothing about the list itself. Further, the editor might have simply skimmed the article without seeing that there was a minimum of two sentence explanation for every list item. you might send in a query ticket and ask.

Probably because lists are so much easier to write and/or copy from somewhere else. I know. I do a lot of list articles and it's annoying to force myself to add explanations even when they aren't needed. (Some items are self-explanatory, you know?) But look at it from CC's point of view: If they allowed lists, everyone would do them and the articles would look a lot alike. The explanations added may help to make them more unique.

Good luck with your writing!

A list is a list, not an article like this site known for. They want in-depth articles. I have done lists before, but I had a full paragraph for each listed item explaining the whys and hows it made the list. Maybe a couple sentences just doesn't explain enough?