From time to time I go back and take a look at old hubs. While they may be featured, they may only have slipped past the QAP requirements. What I'd like is the ability to send a featured hub back through the process. I realize I shouldn't be able to do this for every hub, but if I susbstantially change the hub (say by adding 500 words or more) then I would like to resubmit to QAP.
You mean you voluntarily want to send a hub past QAP?
Well the theory behind this is:
If my QAP scores are factored into my Hubber Score, then if I have a lot of hubs that average 7 whereas my newer hubs average 8 then the older hubs will be dragging my Hubber Score down. So if I substantially improve older hubs I'd want them to be QAPed so my overall quality score improves.
Not sure if it's really that important - but I'd rather be safe than sorry!!!
If you edit it, then it supposedly goes back through QAP. Several of my scores have changed after editing. They have gone up if I added video and additional text. I found one hub that somehow lost text from the conclusion. It helps my confidence in my writing to make improvements.
Simone - wouldn't we see the spinning arrows if a hub is going through QAP? When I do quick, minor edits to a hub that's already published, I don't see that happening. I agree with Simey - it would be great to have that review process to hubs we are tweaking.
I personally would not want this to happen to hubs that are already published AND featured. If that was the case they would have the no-index tag from what I understand.
That would make it problematic for popular hubs that you might want to edit. It would put them offline for awhile, right?
Since I have some hubs that I update as information comes out, it would be frustrating to have to wait for QAP every time there is a tweak.
Maybe you guys are just talking about hubs that have never been through QAP and are still featured?
Viewers can still see the hub. That is my understanding. Simone, correct me if I am wrong. It is listed as featured.
by Dr. John Anderson4 years ago
The purpose of this post is NOT to moan and groan, but rather to better understand it, by sharing your insight and experiences. Obviously we now have to work using its parameters. Stayin' Alive Ha Ha Ha
by Dr. John Anderson4 years ago
HP obviously wants writers to commit themselves to writing more hubs. This is shown by the list of recent blog topics:How to Stick to Your Hubbing GoalsHow to Bounce Back When Sticking to Goals Gets ToughFive Goal...
by Gary Anderson2 years ago
I thought if a hubpage was listed in Google search it was featured. But apparently that is not the truth. I guess I will keep the hubs up and run my own check on them.
by xpressrite2 years ago
So hubbers help? I had four hubs that went from the pending state to having the featured status. Originally they were all viewed on the page where you can hop hubs.Now I dont no where...
by Simon Cook4 years ago
There is a lot of anger and/or frustration relating to the 'pending' system and most of it is down to the fact that it's not clear why there are exceptions - this is justified and there should be open-ness. (Note this...
by summerclark73874 years ago
I just spent a lot of time on this hub; I did my research, cited my sources as usual, and published it yesterday with a rating of 70. However, it no longer says it is pending and it is not featured. I was wondering if...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.