Ever since I commenced writing and submitting articles to EzineArticles in November 2007 I have been intrigued by the feedback I’ve received; and at times, in some ways, it has been a lack of feedback. But, one of the main reasons I continue to submit articles is the feedback I get.
Views
One of the best forms of feedback is the “views” field. If an article title and summary (abstract or ‘teaser’) is interesting enough, or if the field of general interest in the topic at hand is attractive enough, then it can be a pleasant surprise to see an article viewed one hundred times or more in one 24-hour period. My most popular article (with over 10,000 views to date) averaged 250 per day for the first week. It was really cool to watch it progress.
Votes
By far the best gauge of the real value of an article is the rating/voting field (although the ‘EzinePublisher’ field is also very good); unfortunately, the voting field is not used much. Of all the articles I read from other authors in my chosen niche (and others niches I browse), few are rated, but I make a point of giving fellow writers encouraging feedback via a vote, if I can. It only takes a few seconds of thought and then I make the selection.
I vote on two simple criteria:
ONE: Is the author authoritative and is the article written authoritatively? This gets to the heart of the credibility of the author. Most authors I’ve found have impressive credentials. To be written authoritatively is another question. Is there real value in the advice; does it pack a truthful punch? Does it lead to the achievement of an objective? Does it deliver on promises made?
TWO: Structure; grammar and spelling; logical, interesting flow. This is about the technical issues of writing itself. How does it read? Writers lose points quick for elementary spelling and grammar faults or if there’s a lack of structure and flow. This is about attention to detail.
My rating scale
FIVE STAR: This sort of article tops both criteria above. It tugs at the heart strings and a ‘five’ comes instinctively.
FOUR STAR: This sort of article is of high quality, informative, not too long, and easy to read. I would rate at least 30 percent of the articles I read a ‘four star.’
THREE STAR: This is still a very good article. Perhaps the writer has written it well and it comes across as authoritative, but they’re not entirely credible; it may not be their natural or best niche.
TWO STAR: Generally, I only give two stars or a ‘fair rating’ to poorly finished work (which still reads quite well) and if the author has a strong, unbalanced view one way or the other.
ONE STAR: Only morally wrong work gets a ‘one star’ in my book. Otherwise, if it’s that poor I won’t bother to rate it.
Summary
Writers write for all sorts of reasons. Personally, I write because of an innate passion to express myself and help others at the same time; it’s a huge bonus to get a rating which is qualitative feedback on your work. When we read articles, it is my belief, we should be disciplined enough to consider a fair rating as feedback to the author.
Copyright © 2008, S. J. Wickham. All Rights Reserved Worldwide.
s
No comments:
Post a Comment