Eds not so strict anymore?

1. 68

   Daniel Mollatposted 3 years ago

   I haven't visited the forums for quite a while so I'm not sure if I'm posting this in the right place.
   
   I noticed that the editors are no longer as strict as they once were. It used to be whenever I made revisions to my articles I would immediately get a response from editors either confirming the changes or commenting that it needs certain changes.
   
   Would anybody care to comment?

   replyreport
   1. 91

      TIMETRAVELER2posted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I've seen no change whatsoever. The same rules still apply, which is as it should be if this site is to maintain its quality and rankings.

      replyreport
   2. 80

      samanthacubbisonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      We still review every article before it is published, and after every change made! You should be getting emails with these updates.

      replyreport
2. 96

   Beth Eaglescliffeposted 3 years ago

   The editing queues are longer these days. You will get a response, but it may be several days or even weeks after you made the changes. The length of the queue depends on the niche site.

   replyreport
   1. 94

      Shesabutterflyposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I've been waiting over a year for one of my articles. I first submitted it in January of 2018. Haven't heard anything from staff since April of 2018 about this article, yet they've sent others to Pethelpful that I submitted after this particular one. Makes no sense. I finally gave up and just resubmitted it today (causing me to waste a submission).
      
      In regards to simple edits and not actual submissions, I always get e-mails saying my article still passes their QAP within a few days of editing.

      replyreport
      1. 93

         Tim Truzy info4uposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         Interesting. I've been wondering about this particular topic. I may receive an email informing me that the update still meets quality standards (sometimes), and sometimes, that doesn't happen. This is not a consistent response from the team (at least, from what I've noticed.)
         Perhaps, things will settle down, but I wonder: Are some accounts deemed more valuable, so the response is swift? Is there a learning curve going on for the editors? Are there any other factors occurring we don't know about? I don't know.

         replyreport
         1. 80

            samanthacubbisonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            Hi!
            
            No, there is no bias towards particular authors. Our queues are updated based on the time of submission. For a single author making changes, some will satisfy our updated requirements, and some won't. If you are revising an article that you wrote 5 years ago, but it was well-written and evergreen, it'll probably still pass. It all depends on that particular article's content and quality level.
            
            You could be experiencing a longer wait time for articles submitted to network sites due to larger queues on that particular site.
            
            For minor, general changes, the mod team, more often than not, has a very large queue. They review each and every article after any changes are made.
            
            Another thing to note is our staffed hours are unpredictable at times, so some weeks there will be less/more support available.

            replyreport
            1. 93

               Tim Truzy info4uposted 3 years agoin reply to this

               Thanks, Samantha. I didn't nor would I mention "bias" at all toward authors. I mentioned "accounts" which are not necessarily the same.
               We couldn't be creative and not look at possibilities and potentialities, regardless of how speculative those ideas are.
               However, your explanation is useful. The HP Team has never been problematic for me. That's why I never started such a forum thread. allthings are revealed with patience. You guys have your job to do, and so do we. Cheers!

               replyreport
               1. 80

                  samanthacubbisonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  Since accounts are owned by authors, when you asked whether some accounts are deemed more valuable, I just wanted to stress the neutrality when we make these decisions.
                  
                  Thanks for hanging in there! If you experience any significantly long wait times, don't be afraid to email us. Sometimes, albeit rare, articles can "slip through the cracks."

                  replyreport
            2. 94

               Shesabutterflyposted 3 years agoin reply to this

               That still doesn't explain why some submitted articles take longer than others within the same niche site. I had to resubmit an article that was previously accepted to a niche site a year ago that still hasn't been moved, despite other articles that I either submitted or where selected by staff to be moved to that same niche.
               
               It's almost like that article got lost in transition somewhere, although I was promised by staff it was in the que and would be moved to Pethelpful. I just submitted that article in question again today. We will see if it actually gets moved this time or not.

               replyreport
               1. 80

                  samanthacubbisonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  Like I said, "You could be experiencing a longer wait time for articles submitted to network sites due to larger queues on that particular site." The QAP process can take up to a week. Then it is sent to the network site's queue. That site's editor has to review it, which can take time as well, depending on how many articles are ahead of yours.
                  
                  When your article is "accepted" to a network site, it is published pretty much immediately.   
                  
                  You can always send the article to the team inbox to assure that it goes through the proper routine this time!
                  
                  EDIT: I just took a look at your account. If you are talking about the article titled "Human Foods That are Good for Dogs," I see a note from 12 months ago. Maybe you did not receive the email? Or it went to spam?

                  replyreport
                  1. 94

                     Shesabutterflyposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                     There is a more recent e-mail than 12months ago (Aug '18), but I also received the previous e-mails. I was in correspondence with Tessa & Robin. Both of whom assurred me I didn't have to resubmit and waste a submission. Just that resubmitting it would make it move along faster. No where did it say it would take over a year.
                     
                     "However, if an article is sent to our editing queue, like this article, you can either wait for the edit (which could take months to a year)" I didn't realize this meant it could take over a year.
                     
                     I made several edits to the article, but never resubmitted as I'm working on several others that have never been submitted. It was pointless to me to resubmit and waste a submission, when I have others that need to get submitted as well.
                     
                     The editing process is long and tiresome for all parties (authors & staff), but it was a lot easier when we got e-mails suggesting changes that allowed us to edit and resubmit without wasting our limited submissions. Seems like that is a lost practice now sadly. Everything takes twice as long now. Whether I resubmit or not I'm either waiting for qued articles to finally make it through or I'm pushing back when I can submit a new article.

                     replyreport
3. 61

   paradigmsearchposted 3 years ago

   Team employee count has actually increased. Maybe kinder, gentler editors?

   replyreport
4. 88

   Kenna McHughposted 3 years ago

   I have not seen a change. I edit my articles on regular bases and the editor usually gives me a thumbs up on my edits, thanking me for the updates.

   replyreport