Is Wicked Article Creator worth buying?
- Thread starter slevim
- Start date
mindlesswizard
Supreme Member
- Sep 3, 2010
- 1,365
- 293
I got my copy of WAC few weeks before but i found it too complicated. May be just because i didn't played enough with WAC. Then some days ago i got my Kontent Machine and that looks easy and neat.
Between you can try SEO content machine for free trial.
Between you can try SEO content machine for free trial.
socialblast
Regular Member
- Feb 2, 2013
- 253
- 78
This.
I also use it for scraping articles and use WordAI for spinning but when I do tier 2s I do use WAC without bothering to fish out articles and spinning them. It sets up GSA within a few minutes which is good. The articles it creates are utter nonsense though but it doesn't really matter for tiers 2s and above I suppose.
IMCapitalist
Senior Member
- Jan 21, 2014
- 1,088
- 60
Ezine article, article dir. could be a place for buying.
D
Deleted member 731332
Guest
I've used wordai, KM3, wordai+ chimp rewriter, and I own WAC with the tier1 upgrade.
I'll say this.. WAC requires more work/effort than KM3.. But it also gives you more control over the output if you really know what you are doing when scraping with scrape box, plus the any site scraper in the premium version is awesome. I prefer WAC with the premium upgrade over KM3, even though it does take more time/skill.
Sometimes, if I am really bored I will download articles from wac that I scrape with scrapebox (from wherever not just article directories) then rewritethem using chimp rewriter and wordai, then import them into WAC of the build and export into GSA, and that works good too. but I have spent some time learning how to use WAC and it works great for me. I like it.
I'll say this.. WAC requires more work/effort than KM3.. But it also gives you more control over the output if you really know what you are doing when scraping with scrape box, plus the any site scraper in the premium version is awesome. I prefer WAC with the premium upgrade over KM3, even though it does take more time/skill.
Sometimes, if I am really bored I will download articles from wac that I scrape with scrapebox (from wherever not just article directories) then rewritethem using chimp rewriter and wordai, then import them into WAC of the build and export into GSA, and that works good too. but I have spent some time learning how to use WAC and it works great for me. I like it.
Last edited by a moderator:
umerjutt00
Elite Member
- Oct 28, 2011
- 4,373
- 2,493
Consider buying Chimp rewriter pro (costs around $100) and you will get 2 licenses.
ConsultJoseph
Regular Member
- Apr 25, 2014
- 428
- 104
Sorry but I'm not that impressed with WordAI since web-based and takes a greater amount of time compared to software you can install on a VPS. I've used it for a few months and decided to stop.
WAC was my go-to tool a year ago but when KM3 came, I went with KM3 because of the multiple features it has. As for content quality, I think it really depends on your settings and for this, I give KM3 the nod over WAC.
WAC was my go-to tool a year ago but when KM3 came, I went with KM3 because of the multiple features it has. As for content quality, I think it really depends on your settings and for this, I give KM3 the nod over WAC.
Tatsuya
Junior Member
- Sep 11, 2011
- 165
- 28
My vote goes for WAC, since you have more control over the output and there are no monthly fees.
Regarding quality, no auto-spinning software will give you 100% readable content, so getting a kinda more readable content doesn't make sense to me, because the content is readable or not. If it gets a manual review, the person will not think: "Oh this was made with KM3 or WAC", he/she will just see a readable or non-readable article. So, KM3 or WAC work fine for tier 2+, but you don't have to pay a monthly fee with WAC. This is just my opinion and the reason why I am using WAC.
Regarding quality, no auto-spinning software will give you 100% readable content, so getting a kinda more readable content doesn't make sense to me, because the content is readable or not. If it gets a manual review, the person will not think: "Oh this was made with KM3 or WAC", he/she will just see a readable or non-readable article. So, KM3 or WAC work fine for tier 2+, but you don't have to pay a monthly fee with WAC. This is just my opinion and the reason why I am using WAC.