The document provides examples of issues editors may find when reviewing articles in different tiers. Tier 1 focuses on the controlling idea, title, and structure. Tier 2 examines filler content and readability. Tier 3 ensures the article is useful, easy to read, and organized. Tier 4 addresses engagement and audience. The highest tier, Tier 5, is for nearly perfect articles that provide outstanding value. Accompanying checklists and stock comments give guidance on each tier's objectives.

1. Articles Update

2. Tier 1
To complete Tier 1, the editor will check to see if the controlling idea, title, and supporting headlines are worthy of being read.
They will ask if the title makes sense, and whether or not it carries a basic interest value. If not, the article will be returned to the
writer with comments.
What are some examples of issues involving controlling ideas and titles?
Why You Shouldn’t Flush Too Much Toilet Paper Down the Toilet –This answer to this query is, for the most part, pretty common
knowledge. If the writer uses the article to address more than just toilet paper, then the title should accommodate it (i.e. “What You
Can and Can’t Flush Down the Toilet” or “Toilet Clogs: Where they Happen, How to Fix Them”). Based on the current title, the writer
has restricted himself and will have a hard time meeting the word count because he has narrowed his scope too much.
What the Benefits of Curtains Are— (subheadings: “You can save on your heating bill,” “You can decorate your room with them” and
“You can have some privacy.” ) -- Besides being oddly phrased (which dings the authority), the use value in this article is almost
non-existent—what questions will this article answer with any depth, what real value does it have? The facts and logic are so
elementary that they are unhelpful—and the reader gets the feeling that this writer just sat down and thought of all the reasons
that drapes could be beneficial. This writer has not really thought about the readers on the other end. If the writer had completed
more research to get deeper into just one facet of this article, he would most likely have created a more engaging title, had more
substance to work with, and approached it from a more useful angle.
Dogs and Cats-- This article title is too broad and doesn’t explain the relationship between the two parts of the article. Will the
article explain how to successfully keep both as pets? Is the article going to explain the differences between training both of the
animals? Or will it expound on the the genetic and developmental differences between the two? We don’t know what the purpose
of the article is from looking at the title.
“How to Find a Mining Lawyer in Kamloops (subheadings: “Use the Internet”, “Ask Around”, “Make Sure They’re Certified”). Articles
that address how a certain service can be found and tested are normally unhelpful to the reader because they degenerate very
quickly into a common sense mad lib-- with information that could apply to multiple services and categories. If you take this angle
(or another one like it)-- the information needs to be extremely specific, and really answer the questions that the reader would have
with authority and actual insight.
See our posts on ideation for more information about this topic.

3. ☐ 1.1 Controlling Idea
Is the controlling idea present in the first paragraph? 1.1.1
Is the controlling idea engaging, useful, and industry-relevant? 1.1.2
Does the controlling idea communicate the purpose and value of the article? 1.1.3
☐ 1.2 Title
Does the title reflect the controlling idea? 1.2.1
Does the title include a promise of what will be covered in the content? 1.2.2
Is the title grammatically and structurally sound? 1.2.3
☐ 1.3 Headings/1st Sentences
Are headings in logical order? 1.3.1
Do headings logically follow the promise of the title? 1.3.2
☐ 1.4 Formatting
At first glance, are big blocks of text broken up with headers and paragraph breaks? 1.4.1
Is textual formatting (bolding, italics, etc.) used appropriately? 1.4.2
Is the controlling idea present in the first paragraph? (6)
Is the controlling idea engaging, useful, and industry-relevant? (7)
Does the controlling idea communicate the purpose and value of the article? (8)
Tier 1 - Checklist

4. Stock Comments in Tier 1:
• Web readers look for articles that get right to the point. For this reason, it’s important to include
your controlling idea within the first paragraph.
• Our goal is to provide content that is engaging, helpful, and useful to the reader.
In order to fulfill that goal, we recommend . . .
• The purpose/value of the article is unclear. Try focusing on a target audience and asking yourself why
someone would choose your article over another. Check out our section on ideation at blog.writersdomain.net
for more information.
• Remember, the reader’s first impression of your article (and whether or not they decide to read on) is based
largely on your title. The title should be able to somehow answer the reader’s question “what will I gain out of
reading this?” Your title, “,” doesn’t contain enough of a promise about what the article contains.
Tier 1 - Stock Comments

5. Tier 2
To complete Tier 2, the editor will begin a close reading of the article, paying attention to the substance (ideas, supporting evidence,
logic) found in the article. If the editor encounters any of the following problems (which revolve around the use of inane material to
fill word count and/or grammatical errors which interrupt the general readability of the article.) The article will be sent back to the
writer to fix.
What are some examples of issues involving Tier 2 Checks?
Filler/Fluff- Any tactics used which try to overtly “pad” the article without enhancing the article’s purpose, substance, or clarity. We’re
talking about sentences, commentary, and phrasing that don’t really enhance the user’s experience. While some assumptions and gen-
eralizations can made by the writer for the purposes of establishing common ground with the reader, these tactics, when overused,
will actually injure the writer’s authority and the article’s value. If you begin writing without doing any research on the issues sur-
rounding it, chances are you will end up writing filler/fluff. Here are some examples:
• “Definitely have your ducts checked out if you think that they’re clogged. If they’re clogged, then they’ll impede your ability
to breathe. Breathe better by having them checked out” (redundant)
• “The internet has become an incredible place for people to go who are looking for things they want to find. And if you’re
in a situation where you need your ducts cleaned, it’s a place you can go to find someone who can check them out for you.
Be extra careful with your ducts.” (irrelevant and absolutely unnecessary)
• “The duct cleaner you call will have plenty of experience and knowledge on what his deals are and how you can get you the
most bang for your buck. The best thing about going to a cleaner is that they are a professional and will know exactly what
they are doing when they look into their ducts. You won’t even have to get your screwdriver out.” (generalities and absolutes)
• “Your family is the most important thing to you in your life. Can you imagine what you would do if you found out that one of
them had contracted mold poisoning because you never had your ducts checked? Besides trips to the hospital, you would be
beside yourself with grief, knowing that your lack of attention to a simple problem had caused such tragedy.
Take responsibility for those you love and get your ducts checked today.” (overkill of emotion and sentimentality)
Basic Readability—
•“The expectation that chairs made from high-quality frames and that are wood-constructed will perform better is wise.” (This kind
of sentence is very dense and hinders readability.)
Proofreading—We are serious about proofreading and hope that by now, you are too. It’s very easy to quickly review what you have
written and catch missing words, inaccurate punctuation, and homophones. If we see that your piece has more than a few obvious
errors, we will send it back.

6. ☐ 2.1 Absence of Filler/Fluff
No redundant sentences or overly-repeated ideas. 2.1.1
No unnecessary or irrelevant ideas. 2.1.2
No unsupported or unexplained generalities and/or absolutes. 2.1.3
No overly patronizing/sentimental/over-hyped statements (some are ok, we don’t want these to be
devoid of humanity or fun) 2.1.4
☐ 2.2 Sentence Structure
Are sentences basically comprehensible? 2.2.1
☐ 2.3 Proofreading
At a first glance, are there any grammar or spelling mistakes that interrupt the flow of reading for an
average web reader? 2.3.1
Tier 2 - Checklist

7. Tier 2 - Stock Comments
Stock Comments in Tier Two
• Redundancies weaken the credibility of an article. One example of redundancy in this article is . . .
• Tangents and irrelevancies weaken an article because they stray away from the controlling idea and may
waste a reader’s time. One example of a tangential idea within the article is . . .
• This article contains some generalizations that are unuseful to readers, specifically:
• Too much sentiment in an article is not appropriate and frustrates readers.
• This article contained one or more difficult to understand sentences. For example, “. . . “ Try isolating the ideas
you want to express and use simple sentences to separately explain each idea.
• This article contains multiple obvious grammatical errors, misspellings, and/or typos.
Please thoroughly proofread all work before submitting.

8. Tier 3
This tier ensures that the article is basically useful, easy-to-read, and easy-to-understand.
What are some examples of issues involving tier 3 checks?
If all the other checks have been met, then it should follow the content included has a basic interest and relevance for
readers—that it contains solid use value. In this tier, we will also be checking for readability, basic organization, and sentence flow.
“Paint that is created from lead which smells are usually the more permanent paints.” (This sentence really needs to be revised for
clarity and flow.)
“Lighthouse Park serves West Vancouver residents and visitors looking for native wildlife and scenic views as well as kayaking
and whale-watching tours. Visitors to West Vancouver can stay in a number of hotels along the coast during their stay. Airports can
easily be reached from anywhere in the city.” The issues in this example are more subtle (lack of parallelism in verbs, lack of flow
and structure between sentences) but still illustrate problems editors will check for when assessing an article in the third tier.
“The quality found in customized coats will look better longer, and that it will be resistant to the influences that might normally
pose a threat, such as holes and wear caused by fabric-eating moths.” (this sentence is trying to express a worthy idea but the lack
of structure makes it too hard for a web reader to extract.)
“The first thing you’ll notice when you check your lawn mower after an accident is the smells. You are going to see parts that are
bent and buzzing, and you want to see a list of how much repairs are going to cost.” (Besides not meeting some other checks in tier
3, this sentence also demonstrates some problems with diction—the choice and use of words and phrases in writing. Because it
doesn’t use conventional language patterns, it sounds foreign and throws the reader off.)
Editors may not specifically name the problems affecting the readability of each sentence (i.e. “watch your dangling modifiers”),
but will give examples of troubled sentences within your piece. They will send the article back for revision of dense and hard-to-
read sentences.

9. ☐ 3.1 Basic Use Value
Is the sum of information helpful and interesting? 3.1.1
Do hyperlinks appropriately support the information presented? Please make sure to open and skim
through the content found in all hyperlinks. 3.1.2
Are all major points associated with the topic covered in the article? 3.1.3
☐ 3.2 Mid-Level Organization
Is information in each section relevant to and supportive of its heading? 3.2.1
If article presents a series of items, does information in each section follow properly in
a sequential order? 3.2.2
☐ 3.3 Sentence Flow
Are sentences easy-to-read and easy-to-understand, and can a reader easily transition between
sentences? 3.3.1
☐ 3.4 Diction
Does the article use conventional, grammatically correct, and easy-to-understand language? 3.4.1
Tier 3 - Checklist

10. Tier 3 - Stock Comments
Stock Comments used in Tier three
• The links you submitted with the article do not support the ideas you are trying to convey, particularly this
link: . Please make sure your links are helpful, relevant, and unbroken.
• Just as the article’s title should reflect the body content, each subheading should reflect its corresponding
information.
• There are many ways that a sentence can lose focus. A sentence that is not easy to read or easy to understand
makes reader’s job harder, decreases the effectiveness of the sentence, and reduces the readability of the article
as a whole. Here is one example of an unclear sentence from your article: “ “
• Sentences with phrasing atypical to normal speech patterns hinder credibility and readability. Online, readers
expect and feel comfortable reading articles which address them conversationally. Some of your sentences feel
awkward, contrived, or forced. For example, “...

11. Tier 4
This level isn’t required, but is icing on the cake for writers who have gone the extra mile in their writing from the beginning of
their article. The main feature this tier addresses is engagement-- upon reading, the reader is compelled to keep reading, is fully
involved with the content, enjoys themselves while reading, and feels satisfied by the experience afterwards. While these qualities
can be hard to qualify, the checks below represent some features from of this level of writing.
Checklist
☐ 4.1 Engagement
Does the controlling idea have an above-average interest factor? 4.1.1
Does the article use concrete, specific, and interesting examples and points in supporting
the controlling idea and subheadings? 4.1.2
Are sentences varied in length and structure enough to keep the piece interesting? 4.1.3
☐ 4.2 Overarching Organization
Do ideas and thoughts flow well together within and between paragraphs? 4.2.1
Does the article employ appropriate transitions between paragraphs and sentences? 4.2.2
☐ 4.3 Audience
Does the article qualify the audience? 4.3.1
Does the tone and terminology used align with the persona being targeted? 4.3.2
☐ 4.4 Word Choice
Are the words chosen correct in the context of the sentence and overall topic? 4.4.1

12. Tier 4 - Stock Comments
Stock Comments used in Tier Four
• 4- and 5-star articles will normally contain actionable and/or specific information that makes the article
engaging, useful, and interesting. For a higher rating in the future, try incorporating calls to action.
• A strong and logical flow of thought is supported by good sentence structure. However, engagement requires
that sentence and paragraph structures support ideas that are well thought out and clearly articulated--this is
a hallmark of 4- and 5- star articles.

13. Tier 5
This article is reserved for articles that meet a very high standard of excellence and receive an audible, all-around “wow!”
Checklist
☐ Excellence
Is the article free from any typos, errors, or issues that disqualify it from a perfect score?
Does the article demonstrate outstanding engagement, authority, and use value which
draw the reader in?
Is the article close to perfect?
Stock comments in Tier 5
Congratulations! You’re a champ, writer!