Sometimes you just have to shrug and laugh...

[Gauderbock]

I've just had an article rejected for the first time in a *long* time. A lot of the edits I can sort of see the point of, although they're not corrections as such, more a matter of style. They prefer very short sentences. Positively staccato. Fair enough. No complaints. Or verbs.

One 'correction' however sticks in my craw. I've been involved in the finance industry one way or another for nearly two decades, and one of the major keywords in that space is *always* written as a two word term. The editor thinks it should be hyphenated.

Nope.

I guarantee no one in the history of the internet outside gibberish article directories has ever written it hyphenated.

I suppose I should just swallow the edits and resubmit as the editor wants, but I don't know... I've kind of been trying to build a reputation for knowing what I'm writing about

[Lysis]

Yeah, I feel ya. I have had the same issue in my area of expertise. My target is professionals in the industry and not noobs. I'm getting more completely rejected articles wiped from the system, and it's ticking me off. I have to go through the article and figure out what is wrong, which is fine, but then I have to write the overview and keywords again (frustrating). The editor doesn't seem to understand the industry speak. I had one tell me that I need to explain Agile if I'm going to capitalize it, but it kinda kills it when my target is not people who don't know Agile.

But yeah, I walk away for a bit and come back, resubmit what got purged and write some more. We must hate ourselves.

[Pellucidean]

If you include a note explaining why what you did was definitely correct, maybe the editors will allow it. I wouldn't be surprised. One time they dinged me for doing something that the client had specifically requested I do, but once I pointed that out the article was let through.

[Gauderbock]

Oh well, I've just made most of the required changes even though I'm baffled by some of them ('number one' should be changed to 'No.1' whereas in contrast '0%' should apparently be 'zero-percent' - eh??)

I'll just chalk this one up to experience I think. If I tried to change my future writing to fit in with this, I'm not sure I'd ever be able to submit anything again without tying myself in knots trying to second guess the editors...

[LMasterson]

I've had articles rejected before for writing in UK English and the editor missed it. Obviously there are differences in punctuation and grammar between UK and US English, but when you're talking about financial terms that differ significantly between countries too, there's an even bigger discrepancy with terminology than some editors can grasp right away. I figure there are thousands of us and they're not going to remember who's submitting what styles/types/terms, so I won't change my writing style to fit with the masses - because I'm not writing those types of articles for the masses.

Now I put a note at the bottom of the short description, saying "Editors: please note this article is written in UK English for an Australian audience and contains phrases and terms common to Australian readers". They've stopped rejecting them now and let them through, even with the unusual terms and differing grammar/punctuation than they're used to seeing.

[Lysis]

Wait until you get the editor who rejects with a note that "summary is not a place for editor notes." xD

[LMasterson]

Wait until you get the editor who rejects with a note that "summary is not a place for editor notes." xD

Ha! Yes, that would be just my luck!

[Lysis]

lol sounds like my luck. Some days you're the windshield. Other days you're the bug.