question about review

[cosmo]

Hi. I'm just curious about the review time for one of my articles. I submitted it 3 days ago for a public request, and it's still under review. The problem is I submitted a couple more articles after that, and they have already been reviewed very quickly, and they weren't even for a public request. Shouldn't the article submitted first also be reviewed first? I'm thinking maybe I should resubmit my first article and that it somehow got "lost" in submission.

[BarryDavidson]

I've been told that the turn-around time for reviewing articles which aren't for public or private resquests has gone down, always expect it to be 3 to 10 working days - usually 1 to 3 days for requests.

[cosmo]

Thanks Barry

Actually the article that was reviewed wasn't for a public request, and the article that is still under review was for a public request. I'm not in a hurry or anything, it's just that I thought that once you submit an article it's review is according to the time of submission, therefore I'm confused that a couple of recent submissions which were not for public requests made it first compared to an older submission that was for a request.

[BarryDavidson]

I'm somewhat confused about the current state of things on CC as well, so don't feel bad.

[cosmo]

thanks I love it here though, I recently sold my first article. Quite a surprise to see that $0.00 turn into an actual number

[Gouldm80]

I've experienced some of the same issues as you, Cosmo, but I just chalk it up to a few "oops" moments that may have occurred. Personally, I'm glad that the C-C editors aren't as hard on us as we are sometimes on them. I can't imagine having to sift through hundreds of submitted articles every day and trying to sift the wheat from the chafe. I really applaud them for the hard work that they do and beat my own head against the wall a few times when I see some bone-headed blunder that they point out in one of my submitted articles. They now have a "team" of editors, so obviously this site is doing pretty well and they're trying to expand as it does so. Progress takes time and usually there are a few kinks that need to be worked out.
Ultimately, I think that having the liberty to sell one's words for actual greenbacks (or whatever the color is of the currency in each author's country) is pretty darned cool. It's pretty easy to look at that list of "freelancers hall of fame" and imagine ourselves on it, but we need to remind ourselves of all the hard work that those individuals put in to get there. I've definitely had my moments where I felt frustrated about how long an article was under "review", but I try to remind myself that the editors have a lot of work to do, and my priorities aren't their priorities.
I think that the advice Celeste as well as some of the other weathered veterans have to offer is invaluable...just keep writing, and try not to worry about the small stuff. You may have to (like I have had to) send a buyer a few emails apologizing for delays, but ultimately, if it weren't for C-C, we wouldn't even be receiving the opportunities to fill those requests.
I'm sure some fabulously successful person somewhere said something about just forging ahead and doing your best, and the results will follow eventually.
Congratulations on your first sale. I wish you many more in the future.

Mike

[jak]

I'm also hoping that nothing has gone wrong with the review process. My articles submitted on spec recently have all been approved within hours, but the last one I submitted for a public request. That was 2 days ago and I still haven't heard. I'm now having misgivings about it and whether it will be accepted because I remember that Ed once told us that if he has doubts about whether to accept an article he will sometimes put it aside for a while and try to come back to it afresh to make a decision. I'm glad that his load should have beeen lightened by recruiting a team, and we authors should also benefit from that. But I do wonder how the system is working now, and I hope I don't miss the deadline for the public request because of it. Hope the same for you too Cosmo.

And I hasten to add that in general I think the CC editorial team is doing a stalwart job on our myriad submissions, even if there is the odd blip.

[cosmo]

Gouldm80

Nicely said. I'm very grateful to the editors. They always tell me what's wrong with my grammar and give specific examples. I was a bit boneheaded on my first few articles and thankfully they didn't kick me out. Even if I've been here for only two weeks, I can say I've greatly improved my writing thanks to their input.

Jak

Maybe your right. It was a pretty long article and maybe it got set aside for a while or something. I've submitted another one for a request and hope the last one was just an isolated case.

[jak]

Well, mine was accepted yesterday evening - Sunday. The Eds must still be working overtime so perhaps it was just the volume of articles that caused the delay.

Thanks Eds.

[BarryDavidson]

Personally speaking, I liked knowing our editor. He was overworked and needed more help for some time, but that was beside the point.

We all knew and loved Ed on a more personal level than that of some faceless editor/reviewer most other sites have. Ed had no problems explaining a point, regularly published blog and forum posts about the most prevalent mistakes he was seeing and any one time, and would sometimes weigh in on discussions between authors about a particular point of writing. The whole site was more personal - more like a family than a factory consignment store.

Expanding the editing team was a great idea. I'm sure we all drove Ed half crazy (maybe more) some of the time, and we do have some rather prolific writers in the group. That being said, who are our editors now? I, like many others, worry that we haven't seen Ed on the forums in months. There's nothing like a three-plus page thread on one of the more obscure points of grammar, and having Ed pop on to settle the point with a post about what the current standard is. We all knew, for the most part, exactly what was expected of us. Ed was pretty consistent is that he passed through and what he rejected.

Again, personally speaking, the expanded guidelines have muddies the waters a bit. I've been going through the threads seeing many instances of where something was rejected one time, and yet not another. Even long time writers on CC are disagreeing on some points now, when six months ago they all knew what was expected and required. I hope to see the site again flowing as it once did - perhaps even get to know some of the new staff as well as we do the others. The main appeal of CC when I first joined CC, besides making money and setting my own prices, was the feeling of 'family' enjoyed by both the writers and staff. I think that's one of the main reasons why a lot of writers stick around for so long.