Has anything like this ever happened to you? 1 of the 10 articles was approved: http://www.articlesbase.com/alterna...-an-actual-dandruff-removal-plan-1356766.html The remaining were rejected because allegedly "not original copy". I just resubmitted them without changes and hoped it was a system error on their end. What could have caused this? All 10 articles are VERY loose re-writes of other articles, but I'll put my hand on hot coals - they were fresh as fresh gets, when I uploaded them in the evening after writing them through the afternoon.
I've never had a single article rejected by AB. And almost all of my articles are re-writes as well. Hope it's just a bug!
I have submitted a couple of articles, they were originals, so no way they can be rejected. Though I have a quest, how do you define a very loosely re-written article ? 1) Just changing the title of the original ? 2) Title plus first paragraph ? 3) Make some minor changes throughout article ? 4) Any other defination ? All the best for the approval.
If I were you guys, I would QUICKLY move away from the article marketing business model. Unless, that is, you want to spend 6 hours a day writing entirely UNIQUE content. That's the problem. Not every niche has an evolution. There's only so much that can be said in every niche. These directories are kidding themselves if they want 90-100% unique content. QUANTITY converts, not quality. These directories, in my opinion, are going to die a slow death. Start diversifying NOW. These directories can go to hell as far as I'm concerned. They'll survive, but the days of hardcore article marketing are over. Everyone is cracking down, but they're moving to an unrealistic model. Google is cracking down , and these directories are slaves to them, just as writers are to the directories. It's going to be a sad, painful, horrific death, and I hope these directories go broke as a result. They want highly unique content, but the truth is that profit is not made this way. They deserve to suffer. PERIOD. Let's move away, make our money elsewhere, and let them to die, slowly, painfully, and without mercy.
It seems a bit hypocritical to be saying quantity converts, not quality, and then criticize a landing page And if you really believe quantity surpasses quality, you obviously don't have a very educated opinion anyway.
You're right. You can't submit JUNK. It has to be readable. As long as it's reasonable, quality writing, you're fine. As far as that landing page goes, it's simply pictures. It doesn't offer information that would further the buyer's desire to purchase. Also, in certain niches, particular the HIGHLY COMPETITIVE ONES (the niches that make you 100- 400 a day), you need articles for at least 12 hours a day, if not more. That's an EDUCATED FACT, not an opinion. In the niches that make you good money, you need quantity. Period. Also, I'm not talking about SEO efforts. In this case, quality does trump quantity. I'm talking about daily article marketing warfare.
I never had a problem with articlesbase. they automaticly approve all the aricles. I even subbitted 80 spinned articles ( from the service in my sig ) and they approved 79. Dunno why they rejected the last one .
I wouldn't be surprised if Google removes articlesbase from their index..The amount of junk and spam is huge there!
What you're talking about would be a very strict, dull re-write. I did just the opposite with this bunch of articles. In my dictionary, a very loose re-writing means that I picked up a couple of notions from a base article (semantically) but didn't even lean close to the original content syntactically. By the way, 1 of 9 articles was approved and the remaining 8 got rejected again, for the same reason! This is why I hate scribbling down articles on a separate word document. From now on, I'm always writing straight into the article submission form. Also, I have an idea what MIGHT have caused this. Right after finishing the 10 articles, I uploaded a word .doc with all 10 articles in a subdir in my blog for review purposes. Maybe the google bots just swiftly parsed that document and marked it as original?