Talk:Affiliate marketing/GA Review 1
GA comment edit
Inline citations go directly after the punctuation with no space in between. Please fix all occurrences before the article is reviewed. --Nehrams2020 05:48, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Diminished compensation methods section has quite a few awkwardly worded sentences. Also CPC is not explained. I think it would be better not to use these abbreviations (CPM CPC) if you can avoid it. Atually there are quite a few awkward sentences through the whole article taht could be improved.
CPA - what is the action? is it pay per action or cost per action? CPS not explained - is it the Cost per Sale mention much higher up?
Quixtar compensation plan should have an apostrophe.
excerpt from the book "Successful Affiliate Marketing for Merchants", - this excerpt is excessively long and may be a copyright problem. Instead you should rewrite this in your own words, with this as a citation.
Having an affiliate program that is successful is not as easy anymore. The days when programs could generate considerable revenue for the merchant even if they were poorly or not at all managed ("auto-drive") is over. this needs a citation as it sounds like a point of view.
many-a-times - too colloquial
Each devoted to different niche keywords as a way of SEOing their sites with the search engines. - not a complete sentence. -- This article needs a carful copyedit to remove this sort of little problem.
10+ years - more than ten years
but who is to decide about the change of a name of a whole industry add a ?
Code of Conduct -- this section should have at least one sentence in it to summarise the see also main article. GB 12:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
GA on hold edit
I am putting the GA on hold till the style is improved and the huge quote replaced with rewording. The image is probably OK, but more diagrams would be good to illustrate some of the concepts. The scope and coverage seems to be OK. Hopefully the article can be improved in the next week. GB 21:34, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
- I replaced the huge quote with a reworded version, which is still referencing to its original sources. I am continue to look for better images that are free to be used on Wikipedia. I am hopeing that other editors will help a bit with the style and grammar of the article. --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 07:27, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
GA failed edit
I am going to have to fail the GA nomination due to style and grammar problems, as the on hold period has expired. Even the easy to improve parts have not changed. GB 21:23, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
- This is soo sad. I spent a lot of time, even though I was out of town and just got back. Do you mind if I contact you to ask you for your opinion, if I finally find some willing editors to help with the style and grammar to have a look and express your opinion, if it would be okay to nominate it again? Thanks. --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 03:36, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
- Sure it can be renominated once it is fixed up. Some things are very easy, and even I could do it, other things such as style are more tricky, and will need a better writer. It is best not to renominate before things are fixed up. GB 04:56, 12 July 2007 (UTC)