Vivatic - writing test now open for 2 days only.

rellarips

geordie_joe wrote: »

What I would really love to see, is someone who has had an article rejected for copying, post it in here so everyone can feed it into a web site and see how much the software reported was copied.

I'm sure it would help people not make the same mistakes again. And I'm sure a lot of those "mistakes" are writing facts. Because there are only so many ways you can write facts, so you are bound to have the same words in your sentence as everybody else.

If I get anything rejected, I will do this with pleasure, because to-date the only things I have referred to the internet for are accurate statistical figures. If I were to be accused of plagiarism, it would be incredibly interesting to carry out your suggestion!

herzschmerz

One of the two articles I did was approved, and I received £7.50, but when I click on it to see my rating, it says "Your user rating is too low for this job", and my overall rating is now 3/5, so I don't really know where they got that number. I'm happy it was accepted, but I would appreciate some sort of feedback as to how it could be improved. The subjects are all quite dense and factual, so for it to receive 3/5 it must be because they think there's something missing from the article. My writing was in decent English and covered everything I could think of, and I'm pretty sure it wasn't a stylistic fault, since there was no personal opinion in any of the articles, so it's pretty much guesswork trying to figure out how and why they are rated as they are.

My other article 'requires revision', though that is the extent of their request. I have no idea what they want me to add, so it's really not in their interest to be so vague since what I come back with may well not be what they're looking for.

It's a frustrating system aand I do think they're being a little dishonourable, but I find writing articles a lot less tedious than doing surveys, so I'm not prepared to give up on it yet, especially now I have £19.50 in my account and have just requested a payment.

Biggles

Have they now got enough writers?

I've had my test rejected on grounds of 'poor grammar'! I've double-checked, and it's spot-on. OK, a sentence or two were a little complex, but grammatically correct; if I'd known I was writing for poor readers I might have worded it more simply!

jaynemaria

Thanks for the replies to my post. As I said there was no copy and pasting at all, however I think you've hot the nail on the head regarding the technical terms, i did explain in detail how the solar panels were made up and I had to use words that had been used on various other sites as, well lets be honest, techinical terms are techinical terms and you have to be accurate.

The second one yesterday that was approved, I got these comments back.

Good article, well written however please keep other articles relevant to the UK ( I wrote that Europe had more data on the subject as the items had been in use there longer than the UK.) 3/5

Still waiting on the other two to be assessed. I really hoped and still hope this is legitimate, but as others have said the first two I wrote were approved within 24 hours and enow I have two waiting for over 7 days.

jaynemaria

Just a quick update, I have copied and pasted some of the article I wrote into the plaguirism checker and it does show some hits when it comes to the techincial terms, also in a paragraph where I described the positioning of the panels, i.e the panels must be clear of overhanging branches and other items that may cause shadow. Not word for word by any means but enough hits in the paragraph to make it look like I was copying. Just as I said before there was no way around using these terms.

Until my other two are marked I cant do any more jobs as my score is too low with having the 0/5 for this article, so I think I will just request my money and see it as a lesson learnt which is a shame as I love rresearching and writing.

mizzbiz

jaynemaria wrote: »

i.e the panels must be clear of overhanging branches and other items that may cause shadow. Not word for word by any means but enough hits in the paragraph to make it look like I was copying. Just as I said before there was no way around using these terms.

I think though that this is key. They know the internet will be used for most, if not all, of the research. However, their client will have been promised 'unique' articles and where phrases are copied, or mostly copied, this will not be unique and their client will not be getting what they paid for.

When I wrote, and I'm getting 4/5 consistently, I used other sites for 'ideas' but learned the subject. I then wrote it from my understanding and where my facts fell short, corroborated them with other sites but specifically did not write it in the same way. In the above I would have written something along the lines of:

"Anything that causes a shaded area over the panels will reduce their functionality and reduce the amount of power they can produce. It is essential that when fitting the panels they are clear of any obstacles that may cause a shade"

Okay, that sounds rubbish on the limited snippet but can in no way be related to anything else on the web because it came directly from my head, based on the information I read.

geordie_joe

jaynemaria wrote: »

Just a quick update, I have copied and pasted some of the article I wrote into the plaguirism checker and it does show some hits when it comes to the techincial terms, also in a paragraph where I described the positioning of the panels, i.e the panels must be clear of overhanging branches and other items that may cause shadow. Not word for word by any means but enough hits in the paragraph to make it look like I was copying. Just as I said before there was no way around using these terms.

Until my other two are marked I cant do any more jobs as my score is too low with having the 0/5 for this article, so I think I will just request my money and see it as a lesson learnt which is a shame as I love rresearching and writing.

Thanks, that's exactly what I suspected. It may be worth using a plagiarism checker on your articles before submitting them in the future.

glowgirl_2

jaynemaria wrote: »

Just a quick update, I have copied and pasted some of the article I wrote into the plaguirism checker and it does show some hits when it comes to the techincial terms, also in a paragraph where I described the positioning of the panels, i.e the panels must be clear of overhanging branches and other items that may cause shadow. Not word for word by any means but enough hits in the paragraph to make it look like I was copying. Just as I said before there was no way around using these terms.

Until my other two are marked I cant do any more jobs as my score is too low with having the 0/5 for this article, so I think I will just request my money and see it as a lesson learnt which is a shame as I love rresearching and writing.

I've just read through this thread, this is an interesting twist to what looked like a really good opportunity sorry its not working out for you:(, which plaguirism checker did you use? I'm looking for a good free one - good luck:)

jaynemaria

glowgirl wrote: »

I've just read through this thread, this is an interesting twist to what looked like a really good opportunity sorry its not working out for you:(, which plaguirism checker did you use? I'm looking for a good free one - good luck:)

I used some of the ones i found here courtesy of Geordie Joe

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=pla...ient=firefox-a

f1re_cr4cker

just to add i submitted an article yesterday and had it approved just now