Rejected twice -- what am I missing?

[canadianbill2012]

Hello,

My article has been rejected twice. The first time I understood as I used too much of the impersonal pronoun 'one' in a certain context. I have replaced all of those with the 2nd person 'you'. I cleaned up the article and still it has been rejected. Why?

Here is my article below for the tech area:

===

As the news reports an ever increasing amount of criminals cracking into personal accounts online, guarding your identity is more important than ever. One of the most effective ways to safeguard your identity is by using a strong password for each website that you log onto. However many people complain that trying to remember a different password for each site becomes an onerous task. It is far easier to use the same password everywhere.
Well, if you do, then you increase the risk of a criminal hacking into your account and once capturing that password, using it to logon to other sites associated with your email account. So how can you remember passwords for every site? The key is to choose some base word and then add some pattern before or after that base word for each website you use.

[ the rest of the article has been removed by moderator so it doesn't get indexed]
===

Any advice would be great!

Kind regards,
Bill

[TamathaCampbell]

Hi, Bill.

Shouldn't "an ever increasing amount of criminals" be "an ever-increasing number of criminals"?

Perhaps that was the issue.

It's an interesting and lively piece, in any case.

Cheers.

[Judith]

Bill - You should not post your whole article in the forum. It may cause your article to show up as plagiarized.

[Celeste Stewart]

Hi Bill,
I noticed that the word "shear" was used when it should have been "sheer." Also, there appeared to be some inconsistencies when spelling out numbers. Most style guides recommend spelling out numbers smaller than 10 or 11 (one, two, three, four, five) and using numerals for larger numbers (11, 20, 40, 100, etc..) I saw a few 2's in there.

[canadianbill2012]

Thanks for all the advice. I will revise and try again.

Regards,
Bill

[canadianbill2012]

I tried again and still got rejected! No response when I asked what was wrong with it.

This is very discouraging as I do not know whether I am being rejected for content or grammar or spelling or what.

Any thoughts?

[Isabelnewth]

It is hard when that happens: I am sure I have had the same article rejected 3 times: certainly twice. Are you sure that there isn't a reason buried somewhere in the rejection note? I did think maybe there should be a comma after the 'However', and the editors are merciless when it comes to commas which they think are either redundant or missing....It's hard to say without seeing the whole thing, but maybe you should leave it a little while then come back to it? Good luck!

[Dylan]

Hi,

As I have had only one article reviewed so far, and it was rejected, I may not be the best one to offer advice. But I did notice a couple of things, and the suggestion to step away from the article for a while and come back to it later, fresher, with a seasoned perspective, is probably some valuable advice.

The comment about the comma after 'however' was a good one. And if the editors are comma-sensitive, then both you and I are going to have an interersting time trying to please them. I tend to take a few liberties with commas, so if the editors are strictly adhering to (one of the several) guidelines on comma usage, then we could be in trouble. It depends on how much latitude they are willing to allow.

But do use one after 'however,' as it changes the meaning when you don't.

[evaku]

I always use commas after "however" and I have never gotten rejected for it so in case anyone is wondering it's probably a good way to go.

Also I noticed that you said "log onto." I would have written, "log on to."

"onto" works more to specify a certain position.

Your first sentence in the second paragraph sounds a little awkward to me, I would have written it more like this:

"But doing this increases the chances of a criminal hacking into your account and, after obtaining your password, using it to log in to other sites associated with your e-mail."

Anyway, I know this thread is pretty old but just putting this out there in case anyone comes along wondering what could be wrong with the article excerpt posted above! Several little things like that would amount to a rejection.