A Rule for Editors - If it Ain't Broken, Don't Fix It

1. 67

   eugbugposted 3 years ago

   I've had several articles meddled with, even though they had a large amount of traffic. I can't keep track of what all the changes were and I don't know whether the plummeting traffic was due to their modifications, such as changing titles. However, I think if traffic is high for an article, it should be left well enough alone. Don't get me wrong, in general editors do a good job, fixing typos and correcting grammar. However changing structure and completely rewording passages doesn't make sense, unless they have some inside knowledge of how it could improve traffic beyond what it already is.

   replyreport
   1. 85

      jansharesposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I tend to agree. I haven't had traffic change drastically due to edits in a while, I don't think. But I do wonder why changes are made so often, especially if there's nothing really wrong. It passes QAP every time they've changed it so why? I wish they would go ahead and edit (rewrite if you want to) the articles they keep turning down for niche sites, lol! I don't have time.

      replyreport
      1. 85

         Jodahposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         I agree Jan. Why don't they edit the ones that just need a little help to make the niche sites, rather than our top performing ones? That would make more sense to me.

         replyreport
         1. 94

            MizBejabbersposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            I agree. My top performing article is the one on my underground house, and they keep tinkering with it. My house is unusual in that it has rock steps and then a wooden staircase leading down the hill from the driveway into the atrium, which is the way to the front door. They didn't like the measurement or dimensions that I used, so they used their own. This moved the steps and stairs to behind the deck at the back of the house. I put it back the way it was and explained why. Now they've tinkered again and described it in such a way that my steps are the same width as my driveway. No, they are only 3 ft. wide.
            Since I am an editor myself, it makes me furious. I like a few of the things that they've done with a couple of my articles though. They removed a ridiculous video that I used on one of my articles. I thanked them for doing that. They explained that they've rethought some of their requirements and made some changes to them. That's good, but it still doesn't explain why they keep foolin' around with my steps and staircase, which proves they know nothing about underground houses.

            replyreport
   2. 65

      OldRosesposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I believe the "problem" that the editors are trying to address is that Google favors articles that were either published or edited during the current year.  Ideally, you should be making small changes to your articles every year so that they show as "edited" for that year.
      
      I know that it's a huge project.  I have over 300 articles that I work on every year to keep the edited date current.  It takes me at least 3 months if I do a few each day.

      replyreport
      1. 86

         bravewarriorposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         That makes sense, Caren. I should put that on my to-do list.

         replyreport
      2. 69

         Shesabutterflyposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         I don't think that is true at all. Up until late last year all of my top articles had not been updated since 2018 and they rank on the first page and some even hold the snippet. I have one article that I still have not updated since 2018 and one from 2020. The rest were all done in Sept of 2021 (in regards to my highest performers) and I did the very minor grammar updates myself.
         
         In my experience Hp only touches the ones on certain sites. My top performing ones are on Owlcation and Letterpile and I'm hoping they don't get touched.
         
         The most recent ones they went through were on wehavekids (first time ever) and they clearly did not know the terminology because they made me sound like an idiot when it was all said and done. I really wish the editors would stick to spelling/grammar/punctuation ect. rather than trying to reword and add content they know nothing about.
         
         Like Eugene said, if it is not broken, stop trying to fix it.

         replyreport
         1. 65

            OldRosesposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            The editors have been through Dengarden at least twice that I am aware of.  And the reason I gave above is the reason they gave Dengarden authors when they did their first sweep a few years ago.  Their second sweep was last year.  But I had already updated my articles for 2021 before they started.

            replyreport
2. 85

   ReViewMeMediaposted 3 years ago

   I always keep the original copy of my article so if I want to change it back, I can.

   replyreport