You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 4, 2022. It is now read-only.
In the plugin code, in the function keyword_usage, we only check whether a focus keyphrase has been used 0, 1 or 2+ times before. If it was used 2 or more times, the copy for the Previously used keyphrase warning is: “You’ve used this keyphrase 2 times before.” This copy is also given when the keyphrase was used more than 2 times. Therefore the copy should change to: “You’ve used this keyphrase 2 times or more before.”
For context: the warning also comes with a hyperlink to all the posts in which the keyphrase was used, so it looks funny when this overview consists or 5 posts or so.
Technical decisions
Feedback?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
When you pick a keyphrase you've already used once before the assessment says You've used this keyphrase once before., but if you use the keyphrase again the assessment says You've used this keyphrase 2 times before. This is more of a grammar observation, but wouldn't it be nicer if the second assessment said You've used this keyphrase twice before. or You've used this keyphrase twice already.
Explanation
In the plugin code, in the function
keyword_usage
, we only check whether a focus keyphrase has been used 0, 1 or 2+ times before. If it was used 2 or more times, the copy for thePreviously used keyphrase
warning is: “You’ve used this keyphrase 2 times before.” This copy is also given when the keyphrase was used more than 2 times. Therefore the copy should change to: “You’ve used this keyphrase 2 times or more before.”For context: the warning also comes with a hyperlink to all the posts in which the keyphrase was used, so it looks funny when this overview consists or 5 posts or so.
Technical decisions
Feedback?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: