The title says it all. As the saying goes, talk is cheap. I obviously have no previous reputation here. This being the case, I would like for a respected member of these forums to request a review article from me on the subject of their choosing.
High quality articles. $2/100 words.
- Thread starter poprocket
- Start date
- Status
Here is the sample article that was requested by Donace. I figure I may as well make it public because it would seem a little shady otherwise.
Encopresis, an elimination disorder that is found in children who in most cases were previously toilet trained. Encopresis affects approximately 1-2% of children. The main symptom of encopresis is repeated bowel movements in locations where it is inappropriate to do so. Any location other than a toilet, in most cases, is not somewhere that is considered appropriate to have a bowel movement. While children who have been toilet trained might occasionally, for example, have an accidental bowel movement while wearing underwear, if they continue to have bowel movements in places other than a toilet at least once a month for three months in a row, then they have met the criteria required to be diagnosed with encopresis.
There are two types of encopresis. The first type, retentive encopresis is the more common one and is the problem in the vast majority of cases. With retentive encopresis, there is an actual physical problem that is preventing the child from voluntarily having a bowel movement in a toilet. For example, the affected child may wish to defecate at the proper location at the right time, but may be unable to accomplish this due to being unable to feel the sensations usually associated before having a bowel movement. Another possible scenario is that the child may also have experienced pain while defecating before due to the hardened feces associated with constipation. Constipation is commonly caused by a lack of fiber, lack of physical activity, and inadequate hydration.
The less common type of encopresis is called nonretentive encopresis. In this case, the child simply refuses to have a bowel movement in an appropriate place, most likely being a toilet. Given that the child has already been toilet trained and is fully capable of doing so, then it is a behavioral issue rather than an inability to have a controlled bowel movement in the appropriate location. Constipation is not a factor in nonretentive encopresis. Current events that are causing stress in the child’s life may contribute to their refusal to defecate in a toilet. Some other possible causes for nonretentive encopresis are the child consciously attempting to control their parents by engaging in behavior they know is unapproved of, or a fear of defecating in toilets or public locations.
In treating encopresis, it is essential to make sure the child does not feel guilt or shame that is unwarranted. If the child is already feeling guilt or shame about a situation they possibly have no control over, scolding them could possibly make the situation even worse. Professional medical advice is essential to the treatment of encopresis, as there is, in the vast majority of cases an underlying physical problem. If the parent is reprimanding a child for their “behavior” when, in fact, there is a blockage that is physically preventing a proper bowel movement from occurring, this is both emotionally and psychologically harmful to the child. Feeling shame about having conscious bowel movements in the appropriate locations is a harmful attitude for a child to possess, and they should be patiently taught that it is natural and expected for them to defecate in a toilet. In the case of possessing nonretentive encropresis, it may be beneficial for the child to see a counselor of psychiatrist in order to find out the underlying psychological issues that may be causing the unwanted behavior.
Encopresis, an elimination disorder that is found in children who in most cases were previously toilet trained. Encopresis affects approximately 1-2% of children. The main symptom of encopresis is repeated bowel movements in locations where it is inappropriate to do so. Any location other than a toilet, in most cases, is not somewhere that is considered appropriate to have a bowel movement. While children who have been toilet trained might occasionally, for example, have an accidental bowel movement while wearing underwear, if they continue to have bowel movements in places other than a toilet at least once a month for three months in a row, then they have met the criteria required to be diagnosed with encopresis.
There are two types of encopresis. The first type, retentive encopresis is the more common one and is the problem in the vast majority of cases. With retentive encopresis, there is an actual physical problem that is preventing the child from voluntarily having a bowel movement in a toilet. For example, the affected child may wish to defecate at the proper location at the right time, but may be unable to accomplish this due to being unable to feel the sensations usually associated before having a bowel movement. Another possible scenario is that the child may also have experienced pain while defecating before due to the hardened feces associated with constipation. Constipation is commonly caused by a lack of fiber, lack of physical activity, and inadequate hydration.
The less common type of encopresis is called nonretentive encopresis. In this case, the child simply refuses to have a bowel movement in an appropriate place, most likely being a toilet. Given that the child has already been toilet trained and is fully capable of doing so, then it is a behavioral issue rather than an inability to have a controlled bowel movement in the appropriate location. Constipation is not a factor in nonretentive encopresis. Current events that are causing stress in the child’s life may contribute to their refusal to defecate in a toilet. Some other possible causes for nonretentive encopresis are the child consciously attempting to control their parents by engaging in behavior they know is unapproved of, or a fear of defecating in toilets or public locations.
In treating encopresis, it is essential to make sure the child does not feel guilt or shame that is unwarranted. If the child is already feeling guilt or shame about a situation they possibly have no control over, scolding them could possibly make the situation even worse. Professional medical advice is essential to the treatment of encopresis, as there is, in the vast majority of cases an underlying physical problem. If the parent is reprimanding a child for their “behavior” when, in fact, there is a blockage that is physically preventing a proper bowel movement from occurring, this is both emotionally and psychologically harmful to the child. Feeling shame about having conscious bowel movements in the appropriate locations is a harmful attitude for a child to possess, and they should be patiently taught that it is natural and expected for them to defecate in a toilet. In the case of possessing nonretentive encropresis, it may be beneficial for the child to see a counselor of psychiatrist in order to find out the underlying psychological issues that may be causing the unwanted behavior.
Positives
The turn around time was also very good, especially for a 'bitch of a topic' and considering you whipped up a 550 word + post on the subject.
Negatives
There were a few spelling mistakes though it was only words that the yanks took and shot. (ie American English and UK English differentials) so that is forgiven.
I purposely picked a subject that would not only require research but proper understanding to translate the medical and psychobable gibberish in to proper English, unfortunately this was not up to par as you got slightly confused with the definitions of the disorder, or the way you wrote it led me to believe so.
The grammar and 'flow' of the article was ... well it did not 'flow' well and the grammar and choice of words at certain locations was...questionable. (i.e. use of paragraphs and sentence structure at some locations was not great..or good even).
Keyword usage, while using the keyword in such an article is of course a necessity I felt the opening paragraph gave too much repetition and almost at once lowered my expectation of the article, as it broke the flow, and seemed very artificial.
At this point know that my eventual aim was to spin it for article directories so I didn't need a Shakespeare or a Millersque standard of work and at your price nor did I expect it. So keeping this in Mind I would have given you a 3/5 and would have recommend you for quick posts to help with link building.
However review or no review I feel that this transaction should have been seen as a client relationship and as such the topic and the work you produced should have been get confidential, and if you were going to post it, permission from your client should have been sought.
On that note of unprofessional behaviour and the negative marks made above I would give you 0/5 and not recommend you nor use you for any further business.
The turn around time was also very good, especially for a 'bitch of a topic' and considering you whipped up a 550 word + post on the subject.
Negatives
There were a few spelling mistakes though it was only words that the yanks took and shot. (ie American English and UK English differentials) so that is forgiven.
I purposely picked a subject that would not only require research but proper understanding to translate the medical and psychobable gibberish in to proper English, unfortunately this was not up to par as you got slightly confused with the definitions of the disorder, or the way you wrote it led me to believe so.
The grammar and 'flow' of the article was ... well it did not 'flow' well and the grammar and choice of words at certain locations was...questionable. (i.e. use of paragraphs and sentence structure at some locations was not great..or good even).
Keyword usage, while using the keyword in such an article is of course a necessity I felt the opening paragraph gave too much repetition and almost at once lowered my expectation of the article, as it broke the flow, and seemed very artificial.
At this point know that my eventual aim was to spin it for article directories so I didn't need a Shakespeare or a Millersque standard of work and at your price nor did I expect it. So keeping this in Mind I would have given you a 3/5 and would have recommend you for quick posts to help with link building.
However review or no review I feel that this transaction should have been seen as a client relationship and as such the topic and the work you produced should have been get confidential, and if you were going to post it, permission from your client should have been sought.
On that note of unprofessional behaviour and the negative marks made above I would give you 0/5 and not recommend you nor use you for any further business.
Man, I definitely fucked up. I guess I got confused on the concept of a review copy, and didn't think you were seeking it for yourself. Otherwise, there's no way in hell I would have posted the article in this thread. That's definitely a HUGE fuck up on my part. Sorry about that. Not really much I can say in defense to that.
- Status