As you may have heard, we’re walking away from members who send in keyword and keyphrase repetition abuse because it provides for a poor user experience and destroys credibility.
This week, we opened up one of our proprietary article review tools so that our members can see what our editors see when our automated repetition-abuse system identifies a potential keyword or keyphrase abuse.
If your article was soft-rejected for keyword/keyphrase abuse, you’ll be able to immediately see the excessive keywords or keyphrases or both are highlighted.
I’ve purposely made the image on the right very small to protect the member who abused a 3-word keyphrase (10) times in a ~390 word count article [that’s excessive].
We were hesitant to turn this information over because we didn’t want to encourage gaming of the system; yet if we didn’t turn this info over, we’d have to manually tell the member the same information when they emailed asking for help as to why we didn’t accept the article.
In 2008, one of our larger member-user-experience priorities is to provide more information when an article is soft-rejected so that the member can solve their own problems faster.
BTW, since I’m using the words “soft-rejection”, I thought I’d define it: It means we like you and your article and think we could possibly still accept your content if you were able to fix one or a few small issues to make it compliant with the spirit of our editorial guidelines. “soft-rejection” is more like “not accepted yet…” and we’ll help you discover what needs to be done to get it accepted.