Presence of multiple articles under same title and the need for rating to sort them based on quality is the unique feature of Helium. Every Helium member is expected to rate articles written by others so that qualitatively, better written articles are ranked up for the benefit of readers who hunt for information in Helium.
Let us first consider rating of two different (not-leapfrogged) articles.
== Priority No.1 : Value (Worth of the Content) ==
Of a pair of articles presented to you for rating, Helium expects you judge which article has got "better value" over the other and to vote that article up. Helium has also given a 3-point scale "slightly more", "more" and "by far" for you to stamp your judgment.
So, the prime consideration is "value" of the article. In value, the following are to be considered by you:
* which article out of the two gives you more and better information?
* which one, according to you, looks more factual and authentic?
* which one does full justice to the title?
* which one is written in a style that is easy to read, easy to grasp and easy to retain? This is valid for rating creative writing too.
* which one is consistently retains your interest right through (i.e. not boring)? This is valid for rating creative writing too.
Based on the above criteria, you can rate one article better over the other appropriately.
== Priority No.2: Quality of Presentation and Quality of Language ==
In addition to "value", we must also consider "quality of presentation" of the article. Under this, taking for granted that both the articles are equally good (or at least comparable in their values) and that both are written basically in good English free of grammatical mistakes, typos and punctuation errors, we must now give weightage to the following:
* Which one is presented pleasing to the eye and also in a format best suited for Internet readers?
This aspect includes use of small paragraphs, use of reasonably simple writing style (i.e. not using too long-winding and pompous sentence structures, not using all-caps etc), use of sub-headings, numbered lists, bullet lists etc
All other things being equal, the article that scores over the other on the above criterion deserves to be rated better.
How to Deal with "Quality of Presentation" and "Quality of English" issues?
In good quality of presentation, you must consider absence of the following:
* Too large paragraphs
* Word count less than 400 (other than Recipes and Market place articles specifying lesser word count)
* Use of "i" instead of "I" for first person
* Use of "e-mail English" (LOL, ASAP, U, im, ur, b4 etc)
* Excessive or inappropriate use of first person in narration
* Unnecessary use of ALL CAPs inside sentences
Under quality of English, you must consider
* Typing mistakes
* Grammar mistakes
* Errors in sentence structure
* punctuation problems etc
== What to Do When "Quality of Content" and "Quality of Presentation/ English" Conflict with Each Other? ==
Let us accept the fact that almost all of us are susceptible to small typing mistakes, minor grammatical errors and some slips in the quality of presentation. They normally elude our eyes when we post them. The excuse we deserve for such petty failings are to be extended to the writers too whom we rate.
Here, ask the following questions to yourself:
* "When I read this article quickly, do these slips stand out so glaringly and / or so repeatedly, that the "otherwise-good" article gets tarnished by these petty irritants?"
* "Does it appear to me that the slips and petty faults have NOT crept in due to oversight, but due to the author's obvious ignorance of the fundamentals of language, writing and editing?"
If the answer you get from your heart is "yes", then rate this article down (by rating the other article cup), even if the other article is somewhat less attractive in its contents (but free from petty mistakes).
If the answer you get from your heart is "no", (which means the petty mistakes are too minor, not too glaring and have obviously crept in inadvertently) then it is alright to rate that article up (in comparison with the other article of less value but free from such mistakes).
If both articles are of equal value, but these petty "quality of presentation / English" is the only issue in one article, then rate-up the other article which has no such issues.
Whether you rate up or rate down, the appropriate thing to do is to "contact the writer" through the option available during rating and send a message to the author about the petty issues that you noticed, asking him/ her to correct them.
Important: When you send such a message, remember to add the article' s title in your message. Otherwise, the recipient will not know which article you are referring to.
== Serious Issues - Need for Flagging ==
Article written off-topic, (strongly suspected) plagiarism, profanity, self-promotion, erroneous content, adult content and illegal content are serious issues that deserve to be brought to the attention of Helium. Helium has given you the flagging option for these. Once you have flagged one of the two articles, it is obvious that the other article should be rated better, even if its content or quality of presentation is sub-standard!
== Rating of Leapfrogged Articles ==
Are you aware of the fact that you have the option to choose "Same" button while rating leapfrogged articles and when you choose "same", the leapfrogged (i.e. the newer) version replaces the original version?
My simplest and easiest advice to you is this:
As long as you do not find anything objectionable either at the left or at the right (like presence of junk characters) the best course is to simply hit the "same" button, without sitting in judgment. Why? When an author leapfrogs, he knows best why he does it. You don't have to break your head to find which one is better of the two versions and it is just a waste of time. If, per chance, you choose the older article to be better, you are acting against the author's intentions. There are already enough complaints in the Helium discussion boards on this matter!
== A Few More Words of Wisdom on Rating ==
1) When you are presented with articles on a subject where everything looks Greek to you, it is better not to indulge in rating. Use the Skip button.
2)When both articles look highly and equally competitive, it might be prudent to do a skip.
3) In rating poetry or a piece of creative writing or a subject on religion or politics, some amount of subjectivity cannot be totally avoided. But make sure that you are not rating up a sub-standard article on account of your emotional bias.
4) Do not get tempted to rate a "smaller" article as better just because you are able to finish reading it faster! Rate based on content and quality rather than size.
5) To avoid getting your vision blurred, it is better not to keep rating articles under the same topic (which tend come one after the other) in rating. It is better to skip after rating one pair under one title (or at the best, two).
6) Helium has writers from England, India, Australia and such countries where some words are spelled differently from the American English. (Example: Color / Colour). Do not underrate an article just because the author has used British English.
Remember. By rating sincerely and effectively, you are helping Helium to improve its overall quality and image. A quality site attracts more visitors and as a Helium writing and earning member, you are benefited by this influx too.