Why AC Should Let Us Delete or Edit Non-Performing PV-Only Articles

Deleting or Revising Wil Benefit AC, Not Just Content Producers

Ask a Content Producer how to improve page views and you'll inevitably bring up the request that we be allowed to delete nonperforming PV-only articles. The response from AC is inevitably, "We're looking into it." Since they appear to be willing to do this in principle, the cost, time or effort involved must be daunting. However, all the arguments in favor of this idea I've seen so far have presented the benefits to CPs. There are significant benefits to Associated Content as well.

AC is earning something on those articles anyway, so why shouldn't they keep them? After all, they'll still get their 2 cents a month and these articles keep the page view average, and therefore the upfront offers, artificially low, since many of these articles were posted by newbies immediately upon joining AC who didn't know how the system worked, whose later articles perform much better. However, those articles are taking up server space...wouldn't it be great for AC as well as us if they could be replaced with something better?

Say there are 3 articles on AC with variations of the title "The Best Sugar-Free Desserts for Diabetics." (If you've written an article like this, please don't think I'm picking on you. I have read nothing on this topic and am only using it as an example.) One article rambles terribly, presenting no real information: "Sugar-free desserts can be yummy. Sometimes you can't tell the difference. My grandmother once made sugar-free desserts on Christmas but they had nuts in them and Uncle Jake was allergic and had to go to the hospital..." One article's first line is filled with spelling and grammar errors that turn off readers immediately. The third article is actually pretty decent, but the author didn't know how to use keywords when she wrote it, so no one can find it.