Give Me One Writing Rule I Am Missing

1. 93

   paperfacetsposted 4 years ago

   I have finally got some Hubs into the verticals by submitting them. I always go through them and rewrite sentence structure. I noticed in the editor's rewrites many changes are made replacing words and deleting whole portions of sentences. When I read the edited versions they still seem to sound like my writing but I know much was changed. I tried analyzing the rewrites they provide, but can not pinpoint where my written language is going wrong.   
   
   I reworked sentence by sentence on this Hub I want to put in Stockpile under Magazines. Can someone see those glaring mistakes, or a least one mistake I am making and can correct going forward.
   
   Any other suggestions are welcomed too.
   
   https://hubpages.com/politics/i-receive … of-audubon

   replyreport
   1. 73

      Fiorenzo Arcadiposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Deleted
      1. 97

         theraggededgeposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Deleted
         1. 73

            Fiorenzo Arcadiposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            Bev, give me a break, perhaps I should write how to paint a rock. Useless content, without any thought.

            replyreport
            1. 93

               paperfacetsposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               "Welllll, Excuuuse Me", as Steve Martin, pined. At least, you browsed my writing arsenal on HubPages. Thank you, our new Useless Judge.

               replyreport
            2. 97

               theraggededgeposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               I'm pretty confident that those two rock painting hubs will attract more traffic than all of yours over any given period. And, whether you think they are 'thoughtful' or not... well I don't give a flying rock. I like how much money they put into my Paypal account
               
               "He smirked, “I am enjoying myself, I love the scenery.” She rolled her eyes, “Oh I get it, you think coming here impresses me?"
               
               Love your style; very Mills & Boon

               replyreport
            3. 92

               Kylyssaposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               Ooh, do me, do me!

               replyreport
   2. 97

      theraggededgeposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Try pasting your text into Hemingway - free online app. It'll highlight passive voice and awkward phrasing.
      
      As far as content is concerned, it seems to be a bit out of date, mainly because of the slant towards a 2010 magazine article. Could you not take the topic and rewrite it from a current, more evergreen perspective? Perhaps with a title that will attract search engine traffic?

      replyreport
      1. 95

         Jean Bakulaposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         I agree with theraggededge. I think it's informative, and the language is OK. Just update it a little bit. And maybe shorten some of the sub titles. It's a worthwhile piece, don't delete it, fix it up and see if traffic picks up.

         replyreport
         1. 93

            paperfacetsposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            Thanks for the subtitle tip, will correct.

            replyreport
      2. 93

         paperfacetsposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Yes, I see your point. I need to reference more about the main point of 4000 oil oils. The oil boring stops at the Florida border. I will research the "passive voice". Thank you.

         replyreport
      3. 93

         paperfacetsposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Bev, I have known you for many years through the Internet, over ten, I think. and thank you for taking the time suggesting the Hemingway app. It is so easy to understand and I applied it to the Audubon Mag piece. The app really is starting to drive home the passive voice mistakes I make.
         
         I realize now, an app like Hemingway, is what the editors use.

         replyreport
         1. 97

            theraggededgeposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            You are very welcome, my dear Yes, it's been a long time.

            replyreport
   3. 97

      Glenn Stokposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Well, the main thing that stands out is the reference to 2010. That may immediately lose anyone who might have gone any further reading your article. Maybe you can do something to discuss that magazine subscription in terms of the present so it doesn't sound like it's an out of date article.
      
      In addition, I see several formatting mistakes you've made that I actually just discussed in my latest hub that HubPages referenced in the last weekly newsletter. It's about overlooked writing techniques on HubPages. You can also find it from my profile. I think it will help you.

      replyreport
      1. 93

         paperfacetsposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         First thing I did was reworked the author bio, and as most of you suggested. the 2010 references are gone. I wanted to express the detailed information the publication offers.

         replyreport
         1. 97

            Glenn Stokposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            That's a much better focus. It should help with traffic. Just give it time for Google to pick up on the changes. Don't forget about the other suggestions I mentioned in my hub, such as mobile friendliness.

            replyreport
            1. 93

               paperfacetsposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               Later this morning I did go over all 12 points. The amazon mod was changed to the mag instead of a book and I wrote my personal view on it.
               
               I went through the comments and deleted a few,. new photos are going to be added and I looked at the mobile view. Thanks, Glenn

               replyreport
               1. 97

                  Glenn Stokposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  Great work. I see you just added content within the Amazon capsule when you changed it. Notice that it no longer looks like a spammy ad. Looking much better.

                  replyreport
                  1. 93

                     paperfacetsposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                     Thanks!

                     replyreport
   4. 94

      TessSchlesingerposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      I'm assuming you want real information about your writing, rather than someone who is soft soaping.
      
      1. Your writing is stilted. By that I mean that there is no natural flow. That is unusual for someone who reads a lot because generally reading gives one an ear for the natural rhythm of language.. You appear not to have an ear for how language sounds.  Because going through your entire article would be too time consuming, I'm going to use your OP (original post) to give examples
      
      2. In your op, you said " and deleting whole portions of sentences." The word would be 'entire' not 'whole.' The thing is that it's not that the words mean anything different so much as the sound of one is better to the human ear while the other is not. So this is why the editor is substituting different words.
      
      3. Your sentences are jerky and your writing terse. This is because you do not link sentences in a way that makes each following sentence join to the previous one in a smooth way. So, for instance, in your OP, the first paragraph, you start every single sentence with 'I' except one, and in that one, the second word was 'I.'  You should start each sentence with a different word, plus you need to link sentences using conjunctives, preferably a different one each time. Do not use 'and' overmuch.
      
      4. You need to practice 'tight' writing. This means you should say more using fewer words. I am going to rewrite your sentence and tighten it from 74 words to 43 words.
      
      5. In order to get better rhythm, write a short sentence, then a long sentence, then a medium length sentence. This removes the terseness from your writing.
      
      I hope that you understand the principles of good writing a little better now. If you need more help, feel free to ask.

      replyreport
      1. 93

         paperfacetsposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Tess, I hope this is a cut and paste, because you did not read the whole thread. I would hate for you to have spent all that time on an critique. It was accepted by the Editor Team for the Verticals, so I am not touching it at all for the moment. It seems the suggestions I got last week worked okay.

         replyreport
         1. 94

            TessSchlesingerposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            No, of course, I did not read the entire thread. I thought the purpose was to establish why editors always changed the wording to your previous hubs. I didn't beyond your first paragraph of your hub either either. I worked as an editor for two publishing houses in London for a few years so I more or less have an idea of why people would change things.

            replyreport
2. 93

   paperfacetsposted 4 years ago

   Dear Community,
   
   Thank you all who helped me with this Hub earlier last week. I submitted it this morning and in just hours it was accepted into LetterPile.
   
   Sherry

   replyreport
   1. 97

      Glenn Stokposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Congratulations!

      replyreport