Rejection of Article:

[vision]

Hello,

I hope you are doing well.

Most of my articles are about 800-1200 words, so I know sometimes I can make an error. However, I am at a bit of a loss to understand why my recent article was rejected twice. I understand the first time, but not the second.. I know that if you read the same thing over and over again, you end up missing small things that can make all the difference, but I simply can't find what is wrong with this recent submission.

The article is entitled "Green Fundraising: A Healthy Alternative"
It has been rejected twice. It's a small article of about 500 words.

I have read it over and over, and I hate to admit it, but I can't find what's wrong with it.

One other point, would it not make sense to provide some small specific feedback as to why an article is rejected - sometimes it appears as if it is a question of perception, or interpretation about how the sentence should read, instead of how it can be read.

Thank you.

[Ed]

The errors that occur in your articles are grammar-related errors (choose vs. chose, every vs. ever) or punctuation-related errors. You have been alerted to the presence of these problems, and in some cases, have been given additional help - i.e., the error has been indicated to you or you have been given a resource that describes how you can correct your errors. Authors who are aware they are capable of making errors must be more conscious of these errors and seek to eliminate them. If eliminating errors means submitting more slowly, waiting a day or two to make your submission, submitting shorter articles, or having another person read over your articles, then please do so. At the end of the day, we simply cannot identify every error for every article that comes through the queue.

Because your articles are often rejected, please re-evaluate your submission process and take more care with proofreading. The authors who are most successful at Constant Content are those who can catch their own errors before initial submission and who consistently submit error-free work.

Please review the following tips for self-editing:
http://www.constant-content.com/forum/v ... lf+editing

Thank you,
Ed

[vision]

Thank you Ed,

I appreciate the feedback. I have started to get someone to proof read my articles. I will take more time before submitting in the future.
It seems some of my mistakes are sending the wrong articles, or not sending the ones I made changes to. I have also sent the wrong document types, i.e. not a .doc file. and have made errors in the description field. I understand how strict you guys are, but please remember that some of my rejections are because of issues not entirely related to the article itself, but simpe rookie mistakes.

I have some problems with my vision, so I will make it a point to have someone read my articles before submission.

I seem to get ahead of myself sometimes.

I will read it again, and submit only after proofreading it with someone.

Thank you and best regards,

Ian

[Ed]

That's great that you have someone to help you proofread your articles.

If you don't already do this, you may try what another author here does to cull the errors from her articles:

Write your articles at your normal pace, but instead of uploading them immediately, wait a designated time (for example, five days) so that you can revisit them with a fresh perspective. This way, you will still be able to submit at your regular rate and always have an article in the pipeline, but you will also give yourself some time to re-evaluate the article before submitting.


Thanks,
Ed

[vision]

Thanks Ed,

I will do exactly that. I seem to want to get off the ground running, and get as many of my ideas on paper and on CC. However, I must remember that submitting an article that I am not 100% sure of is kind of counterproductive. If it takes up to 3-5 to review, and then comes back as not approved, then I wasted all that time, and wasted yours as well.

When I get into something, I got full throtle. I have to take the time to step back a bit.
I thoroughly enjoy writing and working with CC.

I will take your advice, and take a step back and read my articles a couple of days later.

Thanks again, and best regards,

Ian

[AnneM]

I just wanted to add a small idea that may help you if you since you have vision problems.

There are some types of software that will read the article back to you. I know a lot of ereaders do this as well as Vista, I believe. You may find it helpful because if it is being read to you then you won't have the issue of thinking a word is right because you have read your work so many times that your mind automatically puts it in.

[Debbi]

This is exactly what I do. I am legally blind and use a CCTV magnifier to read hard copy as much as I can, but I primariily rely on a speech synthesizer to do my research and proof my articles. I use ZoomText on my computer to both magnify the text and read me my documents. It is very easy to catch a wrong word by hearing it. Hearing a correctly spelled word but the wrong one (choose instead of chose, for example) will jar your ears. I can also catch typos like your instead of you and dogs when I meant dog. I always run the spellchecker and grammar checker but they don't always pick up on things like that. With ZoomText, you can even set it to read out the punctuation to you.

If you don't have access to an e-reader or other text-to-speech device, have a friend or family member read the piece out loud to you. Or you can read it into a recording device and listen to it.

Debbi

[vision]

Thank you very much Debbi and Anne,

It is very much appreciated. My wife wants to buy me something that I can speak into that will translate my writing onto my laptop for me.
I am not very technically inclined, and am not aware of what it is called, but I think it might work. I will definitely take both of your advice.

My problems come from my innability to see things that are clearly right in front of me. It appears as if I have what amounts to "tunnel vision" or "blindspots" or as my doctor states - astigmatism (sp). I have glasses to see far, and am ok with that, but once I get close to looking at something written on paper or on a computer, it suddenly gets blurry. I find myself squinting, and obviously if the word looks good, I go with it. Even as I write this, I am mainly going with my typing skills.

In any case, I appreciate both of your inputs.

Take care, and if either of you ever need me for something, just send me a quick email.

Ian

[Debbi]

Ian,

I seem to remember Phil posting something about voice recognition software on another thread. If I come across it, I'll post a link to it here.

Debbi

[vision]

thank you again.

Take care

[nichewriter]

I seem to remember Phil posting something about voice recognition software on another thread. If I come across it, I'll post a link to it here.

Jumping in... Debbi, it is called e-Speaking (http://www.e-speaking.com)

I tried it out - liked it but I decided against using it for articles because when I tried "writing" the first draft of an article by just dictating, it took me three times as long. My mouth couldn't keep up with my brain, and the software couldn't keep up with my mouth (hehe). I know I had to talk slowly, being careful when pronouncing words, but by the end of the draft, my mouth and jaw were sore and dry, and I had forgotten a lot of important points. It's still a good software overall, and I would use it probably for short dictations (making to-do lists, brief emails, etc.), but not for articles

[AnneM]

Another good one is Dragon Naturally Speaking. It is expensive but in my honest opinion it's brilliant and learns quickly. I also find another use for it: talking to my dog lol... He barks and I have a good laugh seeing what comes up in my document... Doggie translator

[nichewriter]

I bought Dragon Naturally Speaking 9 or 10 years ago I think and it was a pain in the behind to use. It was hard to train back then so I ditched it and have been reluctant to use its later versions.

[AnneM]

I had the old version too, and I got so irritated with it that I gave up. The only reason I picked this one up was because a few people I know told me it had evolved a lot since its early days.It seems they were right