Both of the "too commercial" articles were written to complete quests. Now they're apparently trash because they have too many product links according to HQ. The links work well with the content and don't overwhelm the pages. Visitors who arrive are shopping - they seek product recommendations.
The two pages below have been around for years, and offer solid content that's seasonally specific.
The below links are NO FOLLOW so I'll probably get point dings to further lower the 83/84 respective lens scores.
- Easy Easter Crafts (http://www.squidoo.com/craftyeaster) was created in 2007, generated nearly 5000 visits in April 2011 alone. It's been SquidLIKED 169 times, Pinned to 41 boards, and has lifetime earnings of $153.09. It's not about making money, it's about content and saving money. It's a long article with lots of outbound resources and gets monthly updates to remove old content and add new crafts as I discover them. But now this seasonally popular page is considered low quality and apparently has "too many keywords.". I've edited the page considerably but it won't publish with the changes; I've requested a greenlight and been ignored so I'm ignoring any more changes. I'll move the article to a better platform soon.
- Kwanzaa Coloring and Crafts (http://www.squidoo.com/kwanzaa-printables-coloring-crafts) was scored at 84 for too many products and too many keywords. It finally published after I removed hard-to-find Kwanzaa books and decorating supplies, but with a caution that it still has too many keywords. How many ways can you inform people about KWANZAA without using the name?
Does the anonymous greenlight-awarding reviewer even know what Kwanzaa is?
I think not. I've been doing this longer than they've probably known about email.