2. Standards of Quality


So, we aren’t here to talk about whether or not something is art (although all your stories are a work of art, right?). We don’t want to reject things based on subjective ideas like “good” or “heartfelt”, because mistakes are more easily made when something is subjective.

Thus, when we talk about quality in your writing or reject something for quality issues, we aren’t talking about our personal tastes. We’re talking about objective things your story does and doesn’t.

When you are writing about how to implement hreflang link attribution in HTML, either the code works or it doesn’t. If you are writing a listicle about the “Best” Crypto Exchanges in 2023, either your rankings are based on objective facts, or they aren’t. Your technical guide either gives the reader actionable, in-depth information, or it doesn’t.

These are the things we’re talking about when we talk about Standards of Quality.

It isn’t about personal taste, but instead fundamental practices all writers should follow.

Read Next:

🆕2.a. Originality Score

Table of Contents:

📗1. Editing Protocol Overview 👫1.a. Second Human Rule1.a.i. Verified Writers⏱️1.b. Time to Review
2. Standards of Quality🆕2.a. Originality Score2.b. 6 Ws Score🤨2.c. Objectivity in ranked listicles🔢2.d. Unranked listicles🤛2.e. Actionable advice
3. Red Flags3. Red Flags📺3.a. Subject Matter😵‍💫3.a.i. Subject matter saturation🤬3.b. Plagiarism🧐3.c. Sources and Citations💔3.d. Formatting is bad or broken😵3.e. Grammar level: gibberish🩳3.f. Story is Too Short

🔗 4. Backlink Rules & Guidelines

4.a. Backlink Limits👍4.b. Banklink quality and diversityℹ️4.b.i. Diversity of sources🥂4.b.ii. Internal linking🔄4.b.iii. Changing links📫4.c. Reposting and Canonical Linking🏬4.c.i. Canonical links to company domain📝4.c.ii. Canonical links to blog networks or social networks