,| , | . Actually they listed allowed tags: , ,,- , ,
,,| , | . They didn’t mention, , etc. But they said “Escreva EXCLUSIVAMENTE em HTML limpo usando:, ,,- , ,
,,| , | . Do não use markdown ou h1.” So we cannot use, , etc. But the card block uses, , etc. This is contradictory. However the instruction says “Escreva EXCLUSIVAMENTE em HTML limpo usando: …”. So we must only use those tags. But the card block they gave uses, , etc. Perhaps they expect us to output that block exactly as given, even though it includes other tags. The rule may be that we must output the block exactly as given, which includes those tags, but that violates the “only use these tags”. However the instruction is higher priority? They said “Escreva EXCLUSIVAMENTE em HTML limpo usando: …” So we must not use other tags. But the card block includes, , etc. Maybe we can replace with ? But the block structure is specified; we need to keep it. Possibly they consider okay? They didn’t list it but it’s common. The allowed tags list may be incomplete; they said “using: , ,,- , ,
,,| , | .” They didn’t forbid others, but said “Escreva EXCLUSIVAMENTE em HTML limpo usando:” those tags. That suggests we should only use those tags, but maybe they just listed common ones. However the card block uses and . To be safe, maybe we can keep the block as given, because it’s required. The instruction about tags likely applies to the main article, not the card block. But they said “Escreva EXCLUSIVAMENTE em HTML limpo usando: …” for the whole response. So we must not use etc. This is tricky. We could rewrite the card block using only allowed tags. But they said “adaptado, contendo obrigatoriamente 2 links contextuais adicionais (1 em cada parágrafo de apoio do card) mais o botão principal com a tag “Link_afiliado””. They gave a specific HTML block. Probably they want us to output that block exactly, even if it includes etc. The rule about allowed tags may be only for the main article, not the card block. The card block is separate and they gave the exact HTML to insert. So we should output that block exactly as given, with placeholders replaced. Thus we will produce the article part first (300-650 words) using allowed tags only. Then after that, output the card block HTML exactly as given, with replacement of {{NOME_DO_PRODUTO}} with the product name. We must ensure the article includes a contextual link in the last paragraph using tag “Link_afiliado”. That link should be the same as the affiliate link provided: https://link.amazon/B0caYwSxQ. Must use perhaps? They said “using the tag ‘Link_afiliado'”. In the card block they used href=”Link_afiliado”. Probably they want us to use the same placeholder? But they said “using the tag ‘Link_afiliado'”. In the card block they used href=”Link_afiliado”. So maybe we should use the same placeholder “Link_afiliado” rather than the actual URL. However they also said “If the question requires indicating the official site, use OBLIGATORIEDADE a URL exata contida no campo: [LINK DE AFILIADO DISPONÍVEL].” That’s for links. So we should use the exact URL. But the card block uses placeholder “Link_afiliado”. That seems contradictory. Probably they want us to replace the placeholder with the actual URL when we output the block. In the card block they have href=”Link_afiliado”. We should replace with the actual URL https://link.amazon/B0caYwSxQ. So the final block will have that URL. For the article’s last paragraph, we need a contextual link using tag “Link_afiliado”. Probably we should also replace with the URL. But they said “using the tag ‘Link_afiliado'”. Might mean use the same placeholder? But they also said “If the question requires indicating the official site, use OBLIGATORIEDADE a URL exata contida no campo: [LINK DE AFILIADO DISPONÍVEL].” So we should use the exact URL. So we will use Link_afiliado? Actually they said “using the tag ‘Link_afiliado'”. In the card block they used href=”Link_afiliado”. That is a placeholder. But they also said “URL exata contida no campo”. So we should replace with the actual URL. I think we should output the actual URL. Thus in the article’s last paragraph, we will include a link with the URL and rel attributes. Now craft the article: 300-650 words. Must be analytical, no intro, directly into info. Must vary profile ideal, who won’t benefit, common purchase errors, FAQ contextual, mini editorial opinion. Must end with a paragraph containing a contextual link using “Link_afiliado”. That paragraph should be the last paragraph of the article, before the card block? Probably after the article we then output the card block. The last paragraph of the article must contain the link. So we need to embed the link there. We must not repeat info from earlier part of text (the initial description). So we should not repeat the same sentences about the story. We can discuss target audience, cost-benefit, editorial closing. Word count: aim around 450 words. We must use only allowed tags: , ,,- , ,
,,| , | . So we can structure with for sections, for paragraphs, - for lists. Avoid other tags like
, is allowed. Use for emphasis. We must not use headings like h1, h2, h4, etc. Only h3 allowed. So we can use for section titles. We must not use etc. We must not use markdown. We must not use greetings. We must not repeat information from the beginning of the text. The beginning described the product details. So we should avoid repeating those details. Focus on audience, cost-benefit, etc. Now craft. We’ll start withPúblico‑Alvo e Perfil Ideal maybe but h3 is allowed. Use etc. We need to vary between ideal profile, who likely won’t benefit, common purchase errors, FAQ contextual, mini editorial opinion. We need to end with a paragraph that contains a link using the URL. Let’s draft: Público‑Alvo e Perfil IdealLeitores que buscam romance contemporâneo com elementos de esporte, rivalidade erótica e dinâmica de found Relacionado
| | | | |