Constant Content

I have a few questions regarding the editing process on this site. My first question is about the prioritization of "private request" as well as "public request" articles over regular articles written on spec. Reading this forum leads me to believe that articles written for requests are given top-billing and reviewed first, but it has been my experience so far that oftentimes that's not the case. Is there some reason for this?
My second question is about consistency with the editing staff. I've noticed that sometimes I'll have an article rejected for something that with another article wasn't an issue. For example, I was always taught that when you combine three things with commas and then put an "and" before the third item, it's up to you to determine whether you want to or do not want to place the third comma...example: toys, hamburgers, and ice cream. However, an article of mine was rejected for using this third comma. I've also looked through various other articles on here and found spelling errors, incorrect grammar usage, and punctuation errors. So why are some of my articles rejected for "wordiness" when I place an extra accentuating adjective to reinforce a point? For example: saying that something is "very dry" or "extremely difficult". In other articles, I've placed commas after an introductory section of a sentence and then had the article rejected for using too many commas...similarly, I've had articles rejected for not placing a comma after an introductory section of a sentence. It's becoming kind of confusing.
I'm trying to write some "private requests" for a client who has been kind enough to ask me to produce more work for him, but the editing process is really screwing up the timing. I'm trying to have a good attitude about this, but when I read other articles that are replete with errors, I feel pretty frustrated. The customer even informed me that he made a request from another author, and their article was approved within a few hours. Is there a pecking order that you have to climb when you're a newer writer here?
Anyway, I hate to be the squeaky wheel, but I would like to further my understanding of how this site works. Thanks.

Mike

Hello,

Try not to worry about other mistakes that have slipped by the editors. Doing so only leads to frustration as you seem to be experiencing. What really matters is your one article right now and how you can make sure that it gets accepted.

As far as the serial comma, I believe that Ed prefers it because it reduces confusion. I'm surprised an article would be rejected for USING the serial comma. Of course, there are several reviewers now, so I imagine that consistency amongst the team could suffer from time to time. I have a few clients that I work with that only want the serial comma used if the list is longer than three items and want it dropped if the list is only three items long. There are so many opinions on serial commas that it's not surprising that the individual reviewers might have individual preferences. I'm still surprised that an article would be rejected for using it though. There must have been other reasons.

Wordiness - adjectives like "very" and "extremely" are overused and lead to excessive wordiness. Those words may reinforce the point, but think about it. Are they doing it well? Or are they weak words? The desert air is very dry. I am extremely thirsty. The dry desert air has sapped the moisture out of me. I'm parched.

I imagine that yes, there is some sort of a pecking order. Established writers have proven themselves and newer ones haven't yet had that chance. I believe that it is indeed likely that some writers have their private submissions approved faster than newer writers working on their first few attempts. Again, think about it for a moment. If you've reviewed 1,000 submissions from a single writer and have seen consistent error-free work, would you spend as much time reviewing the 1,001st submission as you did the first few? When two articles arrive on your desk, one from the established writer with 1,000 successful submissions and one from a brand new CC member, which one will you spend more time examining? Would you treat both articles exactly the same? While it would be nice, I doubt it's practical to treat all submissions the same from a time management perspective.

If you want to post a few examples of comma related rejections in this post, maybe we can figure out what's going on.

Thanks for responding to my inquiry, Celeste. I figured that there might be a pecking order, but I just wanted to make sure for the sake of my own expectations. I understand the reasoning you laid out, and I agree with that train of thought. It is frustrating to have to wait longer, but I suppose that's just what it's like when you're the new writer on the block. I agree completely (too wordy? ) that certain writers have earned the right to have their work looked at first, and hopefully some day I'll attain that status.
I delete all of my rejection emails after making my corrections, so I can't quote an instance where that was the case. I don't like to keep negative emails...they're almost like a reminder of failure...one of my idiosyncrasies. lol I do remember that it was a situation where there were three items, and I placed a comma before the "and" after the third one, and that was one of the things that was listed as needing correction. I was a bit surprised. I think there was also an issue with using 2nd and 3rd person in the same paragraph in that article. That's another thing that kind of throws me for a loop. It's really easy to tie 2nd person and 3rd person together, and it seems like that shouldn't be an issue. Like saying, "Some people have their articles rejected for errors. If you would like to avoid having this happen, implement fail-safe strategies." Wouldn't that be a 3rd person that alters to being 2nd person? But it seems to fit. Or maybe I've just been thinking incorrectly my entire life. lol That is a distinct possibility.
Another question...is it ok to use "we" even though it's first person plural? I think "we" can be a very powerful tool when writing and helps build empathy. Does C-C frown upon its use?
I feel like I'm becoming paranoid, and my writing is suffering as a result. Thanks for taking the time to respond, Celeste. I really appreciate the advice.

Just so you know, the same writers that get lightning fast approvals for private requests don't necessarily get equally fast approvals on public requests or general submissions. I think private requests have priority - someone's waiting for it - and if the editor sees an established writer penned it, it might get approved quickly. I'm willing to bet that they go in order for public requests. And I know for a fact that it takes a long time for general submissions to be approved.

The "we" as a collective is okay according to Ed in past discussions. For example: As humans, we are fragile. Or when the author is part of the collective audience such as a businesswoman addressing issues women face in the workplace, she might write: Women have made great strides in the workplace, but we haven't come far enough. However, "we" refering to specific people isn't allowed such as: We were impressed by the quality of the food.

As far as second and third person voices in the same paragraph goes, I don't know. Your example seems fine. Maybe the switch in the article was more jarring than that?

Jarring example: Disneyland is known for treating its workers well. Workers receive excellent pay, full benefits, and free meals. You also get to ride all of the rides for free.

That shift would be a problem; "Workers" also get to ride all of the rides for free. "You" is misplaced here and jarring.

An example where I don't imagine a problem with a shift would be: Disneyland is known for treating its workers well. You'll see this when you first apply for a job and the receptionist gives you an application, a pen, and a Mickey Mouse cookie.

Ok, thanks Celeste. As always, you're right here to help curious authors. C-C should pay you for your contributions to the forums. Maybe we should get a petition going?

Celeste, do you really get a pen and a Mickey Mouse cookie when you apply at Disneyland? Kind of an off-the-topic question, but it would be kind of cool if they did.

I just made that up. It would be cool though. Maybe I should apply for a job as a consultant to Disney

I figured you made it up when you did not cite your source Celeste, but how creative you are.

Gouldm80 wrote:I've noticed that sometimes I'll have an article rejected for something that with another article wasn't an issue. For example, I was always taught that when you combine three things with commas and then put an "and" before the third item, it's up to you to determine whether you want to or do not want to place the third comma...example: toys, hamburgers, and ice cream. However, an article of mine was rejected for using this third comma. I've also looked through various other articles on here and found spelling errors, incorrect grammar usage, and punctuation errors.

Mike,

I feel your pain there. In the past, at least here on CC, as long as you were consistent with your comma usage you could be reasonably assured the article wouldn't be rejected. I have written for other sites where 'comma-Nazis' tend to be a bit overzealous in the modern act of penalizing almost any usage of commas. Even my wife, who has a degree in journalism and has been an editor for over twenty years, gets blasted for using commas even when they're grammatically correct. Many modern editors want short sentences which contain smaller words.

***My 2 cents***

Commas are under attack. Frequent comma use is a sign of loose writing. (Originally, that previous sentence was going to be "Basically, the more commas you use, the more likely your writing needs improvement." See the difference?) I am guilty of this myself, 100%.

There have been conversations about the serial comma. I use it because it's what I was taught. The last item gets a conjunction and a comma before it. I understand though the argument that serial commas should only be used when necessary for clarity. Think of it as "going green." By omitting the serial comma when it's not needed for clarity, you conserve a microdrop of ink if the piece is printed!

The best example, I think, is referring to colors:

Susie can make scarves in red, blue, gold and green. (serial comma not necessarily needed, would assume 4 designs) But what if you meant only three designs?
Susie can make scarves in red, gold and green, and blue. (need serial comma)

Does that help???? Admittedly, I am someone who doesn't save the microdrop of ink. However, this is laziness on my part. Reading over my son's 5th grade grammar homework, I know the "new generation" is instructed to drop the Oxford comma.

As far as mixing second person and third person, the only thing I could think of is:

As a smart business woman, you are always looking to bring down expenditures. She can cut costs in office supplies, labor costs or production expenditures.
Second Person Third Person

If I read an article that did that, I would find it awkward. Even if the sentences were not back-to-back like the example above. I know you used "some people" but you could substitute "they" if you had a qualifying noun. If you somehow used "you" to address the reader, I could see how that would be awkward. Hope that helps.

We word geeks are always up for debating grammar gunk.