Article Spinning:Is This Possible?

Your question kinda not clear. You can have the brackets in UAW that will also spin again.

If you have an article is there a software that adds different words meaning the same in brackets so you could plug it straight into UAW.

This would save having to manually do this in UAW.

Cheers

Sorry.

I just wanted to check if there is a software that adds words meaning the same to your article in {} for example.

"I made sausages using a cooker." would become

"I made sausages using a {cooker|grill|oven}."

At the minute you have to manually do this in UAW and then submit it so you get various versions. I was just wondering if there is a software that does this.

Does that make sense?

Cheers Guys,
Rob

Hi Rob,
I've not heard of one, other than one that I wrote but used for my own purposes only.

Basically, you enter the text. The software highlights one word at a time and pulls up a dictionary from word (word is mandatory), and offers the alternatives. You pick which ones you want, and then move to the next word. The software then spits out the {this|or|that} format (and also then went on to generate some of the spun files as well).

If there are enough people interested in that, I could dig it up and dust it off...

Andy

I doubt anyone would be interested in yet another manual / semimanual solution, when there's an automatoic one already available:-

Automatic Jet Spinner Software to rewrite your articles instantly

I doubt anyone would be interested in yet another manual / semimanual solution, when there's an automatoic one already available:-

Automatic Jet Spinner Software to rewrite your articles instantly

As Jon has already said, there isn't any point in having an automatic
solution that doesn't involve human intervention. You might as well
use a fully automated package and cross your fingers that you don't
have to do too much re-editing.

HTH

Glenn

Here is some results and comparisons below

Using this autojestspinner @ 60c no control

As Jon has{ already|} {sai|claime|declare}d, there{ is no|'s no| isn't any} point in having an automat{ic|ed} Solution that does{n't involv| not requir|n't requir}e human intervention. You m{ay as|ight as} well {Use|Employ} a {ful|entire|total}ly automated package and cross your fingers that you do{n't| not} Have to do too much {re-edit|edit|re-word}ing.

Output

1) As Jon has said, there is no point in having an automated Solution that does not require human intervention. You may as well Employ a entirely automated package and cross your fingers that you do not Have to do too much editing.

2) As Jon has already declared, there's no point in having an automatic Solution that doesn't require human intervention. You may as well Use a entirely automated package and cross your fingers that you do not Have to do too much editing.

3) As Jon has already declared, there's no point in having an automatic Solution that doesn't require human intervention. You may as well Use a entirely automated package and cross your fingers that you do not Have to do too much editing.

Using magic article rewriter for 5 minutes not by a good English writer and a one time owned licence. As I have added the variables from a stored database from within the program I have full control

Output

As Jon has {already|{previously|formerly } } {said|whispered}, there isn't any {point|{reason|cause|grounds|incentive } } in having an {automatic|automated|computerized|programmed}
{solution|answer|way out} that doesn't {involve|engage|entail|require|include} human {intervention|interference|intrusion|involvement}. {You might as well use a|You no better off using a} {fully|{completely|from tip to toe|entirely } } {automated|computerized|robotic} package {and|then|as a consequence} cross your {fingers|toes} that you don't {have|take part in} to do too {much|a great deal|a large amount of} {re-editing|editing}.

1) As Jon has already whispered, there isn't any incentive in having an automatic
way out that doesn't include human involvement. You no better off using a fully computerized package then cross your fingers that you don't take part in to do too a great deal editing.

2) As Jon has already said, there isn't any point in having an automatic
solution that doesn't include human interference. You no better off using a fully automated package and as a consequence cross your fingers that you don't
take part in to do too much editing.

3) As Jon has formerly said, there isn't any point in having an computerized
solution that doesn't include human intervention. You no better off using a fully computerized package as a consequence cross your toes that you don't
take part in to do too a great deal editing

To be honest, I wouldn't waste my time just taking an article and spinning it into many variations. That can leave a HUGE footprint unless done to a very high level. I prefer to use varied content for each article BUT content that still fits.

I've used traditional spinning methods for years and LOTS of those articles dis-appeared over time. I now create articles using a different technique and am finding the results to be far better than previous methods.

Just my two cents.

I'll add another 2 to make 4 cents.

use the 'randomizer' jet spinner enhancements. Sentences get included randomly according to your specifications. As most sentences are self-coherent entities, and most articles contain rather a lot of 'filler', as long as you don't drop too many sentences, you can still retain a good flow across the article.

you specify it like this:-

<!--randomize=85-->

<!--preservefirst=1-->

<!--preservelast=3-->

which means no sentence has more than an 85% chance of being included, and ALWAYS show the first sentence, and the last 3.

<!--randomize=90-->

would mean no sentence has more than a 90% chance of getting included in any particular spin cycle.

simples, innit?!