markkuss:


https://docs.google.com/document/d/14Kyf3STWtU1ttyq0MHW4VzBv6DjQFg306icfgkuPG_0/edit?usp=drivesdk


This is one of the sample you requested I follow on the writing style

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Le2MNs6nCnAgUJiJ0rE4OV_5TUabv4mb/edit?usp=drivesdk&ouid=107728963235017540912&rtpof=true&sd=true

I just read the first article and I agree with Kyuhani that it leaves much to be desired.

The write-up is unnecessarily verbose (too much big English used sometimes out of context) and the meanings are unclear in several instances.

I also spotted some grammatical errors although not too many. The spellings were correct but many words were just misused. Moreover, the presentation could be improved upon and the readability too. It just feels too mechanical.

The writer needs to understand that Grammarly Premium is a machine and not a human. It can correct errors but it's suggestions are often too robotic and make reading difficult since it can't feel.

Remember to balance Grammarly with your human judgement. Read your article with neutral eyes and check if e dey sweet or not.

Honestly, if I don't blame the employer for rejecting this but I do believe that the writer deserves some compensation for his time and data at least. We can only keep getting better.

09029387661 is the number to call