Comments by Christophe Bertrand (Top 3 by date)

Thank you Sergey for your suggestions.
I will remind them for my next publications.
For that particular text & code, I finally just put it on my blog, as a quick solution to a small problem other programmers can be faced to.
From now, I beleive I will post my next small code solutions on GitHub or equivalent and on my blog, that seem to be more adapted (or where they will fit better).
Thank you again for your time and effort.

Sergey,
You are right, I clicked a bit quick on the wrong button.

About the kind of publication, personally I imagine three categories:
. Quick tips
A small piece of code, very reusable and adaptable, less than 8 lines.
. Solution
A complete code that solutions a problem. The code can be small or big.
. Article
Mainly a text explaining a technique, testing a software, or anything comparable to an article on paper.
The code should be a set of examples, not a library, an application, or any kind of 'solution'.

The problem on CodeProject seems to be there is no equivalent to the second category. That is why many texts/codes are put in one of the two existing categories but do not fit well in any of them.

Probably, a more reasonable solution would be to have only one category, and have more options in the search page, as search by code size.
That would avoid problems of interpretation, and personal opinions ("Is it a real article ?", "Is it useful ?").
The main preoccupation of a reviewer should be "Is it comprehensible ?".

As Sergey said, the vote system is already here to have pure opinions.

In other words:
. "Is it a real article ?"
is not a reasonable question since the definition of a "good article", or even the simple definition of "article", is questionable.
. "Is it useful ?"
can not be answered by somebody who is not faced to the problem the solution solves. Who can vote for something he does not know anything about or is not interested about ?
. "Is it comprehensible ?"
is a reasonable question because the answer can be argumented and is as independent from a personal opinion as possible. And the answer can be useful to the text/code author and help him to improve his work.

That is why I suggest the CodeProject staff to either give reasonable rules to their reviewers or change the article FAQ (to write clearly the real requirements of an Article).
It is a matter of being clear, inside and outside.

Thank you for your answers and interesting opinions.
Personally I think I have my answer.