Hard Rejected, needs your suggestion. Too much depressed (:

Envato Authors CodeCanyon
1

I am too much depressed for my item is rejected. I give lots of effort for this project but i dont understand why my item is rejected. Please give me a suggestion.

User Login :

Email : userone@gmail.com
password: 12345678

Admin Login :
https://smartsoftsolutions.info/smarthyip/admin
Email: admin@gmail.com
password: admin123

2

It could related to legal issues as “investment” platforms usually end of scamming people and I’m pretty sure Envato doesn’t want to get involved it.

4

Already this type of investment or hyip site available in codecanyon. So i think legaly its ok but may be main problem in Title (SmartHyip - Best Investment Platform). I think my site is good but not best others codecanyon investment item. So may be this could be issue.

5

Did you use core php or framework?

Modified
I’m no expert but your user pages (dashboard, investment log, 2fa, etc) are you basic. Does look premium.

Your investment log page is not responsive on mobile.

You tag other experts
Cc: @baileyherbert @mgscoder your expert opinion is needed

Modified Again:

Your home page fails several validations, not sure how your authenticated pages would fare
https://validator.w3.org/nu/?doc=https%3A%2F%2Fsmartsoftsolutions.info%2Fsmarthyip%2F

6

I didn’t know / I haven’t checked the items. Design could be the main issue ( it probably is )

If it was related to the code, you’d get soft rejected instead of hard therefor you may have a chance to fix the coding.

7

ok may be i need to improve many things.
Need more proper suggestion from @baileyherbert @mgscoder . Please give me some tips and reason for hard reject.

thanks

8

I think we’re far beyond the days where design like this was acceptable. You need to go back to the beginning and make this look clean, professional, and consistent. I know design isn’t very enjoyable for most programmers, but the world we live in now demands it.

It seems you allow multiple languages to be defined at the same time, and users can choose between them. My advice to you is to get rid of this feature – only allow a single language, because the effort involved in properly implementing such a system would be significant, and you’re far from it:

  • Pretty much all of the content management in your script only accepts input for a single language
  • Titles, meta tags, open graph aren’t able to be edited per-language
  • Your implementation is extremely sloppy for SEO – no canonicals, no alternate links, language switcher not using hreflang links, no locales in the URL to differentiate between languages, etc.

Your language editor is a bit painful to work with. I wouldn’t enjoy having to click a button for each phrase before I can edit it. Consider a more simplistic approach like this. I also don’t see a way to toggle “right-to-left” mode which is essential for languages like Arabic.

I also see a bunch of small scattered issues. Typos, misspellings… You’re using the wrong mime type for the favicon (image/x-icon is for .ico, but you specify a .png), no way to edit the meta tags per-page which is essential these days, and you need to minify your JS and CSS – those files are enormous right now.

This is not a complete or comprehensive list by any means – just some things that I found. I can’t say any specific reasons for rejection, but this is a demonstration of what the reviewer means by “quality”.

I wouldn’t be concerned about W3 validation, by the way. Most websites don’t follow the HTML5 specification, so modern browsers and crawlers are all fully capable of working “out of spec” and these errors won’t cause any issues. I haven’t run my own sites through these since 2010 or so. :sweat_smile: