Currently I have several very good hubs that you are not featuring despite my having made significant additions to them. Rather than just send me the form letter/email telling me they are not going to be featured, why not specifically tell me what they need? The editors are not helpful.
I had the same problem in the past and being referred to the Table which indicates the requirements for a Hub score of 4 -- 6 -- 8 -- 10 was not helpful. It is too general and doe not give the hubber any clear direction.
I upgraded three hubs, but purely by trial and error -- it took a long time, a lot of work and the Table was not helpful because I had already met the level 8 requirements as I understood them. In a system (HP) that is supposedly so codified, computerized, and based on a set of algorithms,
it seems very hard to believe that HP can't be more specific about the improvements which should be made. Some sort of algorithmic print out that indicates the areas of deficiency would help both individual hubbers and improve the quality, thus the profitability, of HubPages overall. Thank you
That table with the Hub Score of 2 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 10 and what that means is not helpful at all. I think this particular hub score feature should be shown in the stats for every hub so we can see what score each hub has and we should be told what it is that we lack in the hub if the score is not 10 instead of us trying to figure out what is wrong ourselves.
This would be the quality score I suppose and not the hub score as hub scores go from 0-100.
I would guess organization.
No subheadings. No images. Wall of text.
This is what a 7 organization looks like.
This is what an 8 organization looks like
This is what a 4 organization looks like:
Which looks more like your hubs?
This is the scoring rubric.
Thanks Melisa and I know you are offering the information to all hubbers and I hope it helps some. I am sure it will.
But I think there still some hubbers like me who are frustrated. I have been a Level 7 for over a year, currently have 101 hubs and all 101 of them are featured, every one has lot of capsules, subtitles, the text is broken up nicely, plenty of pictures, maps, photographs.
So last week only 98 of my hubs were featured and it took me several hours of hit and miss improvements and changes to get the other 3 to pass the standard for being featured. These were hubs that had been featured and performed quite well in terms of hits and comments even though they aren't particularly commercial.
So I repeat my question, why can't we get a brief computer generated mssg (of course I don't expect a staff member to pour over each hub and end me a hand written note!) that says here are your two problems. Fix them or else. That would be so helpful and result in better quality hubs. I would gladly sing HP 's praises to the heavens.
Because that would mean that they would have to manually review every rated hub and make a report up citing every error.
The costs would be amazing as there are over a million hubs being rated.
If you are asking why they aren't releasing scores... I'm not sure. I would imagine because it would look like a nuclear bomb dropped in the forums.
When it comes to QAP only the specific hub in question matters. Raters have no idea how much traffic it's getting, how many comments it has or really anything about it's author.
HP continually talks about algorithms and computer generated stats. As I said above ( did you not notice) I am not, and I don't think anybody expects a million hubs to be rated by hand. But somebody clever could find a way for a program to crawl our hubs and not the positives and negatives. This is the 21st century for heavens sake.
There is a program that will evaluate a student paper for me and compare to tens of thousands of sources and then indicate which, if any, sections are plagiarized.
I don't do it, a software program does it and HubPages uses something similar already. Expand the capabilities, produce better hubs, raise our ranking with Google eliminate a lot of the hubber whining and carping!
Its a win / win / win / win solution. lol
The million hubs are rated by hand.
It takes about 2-3 minutes per hub.
It would take at least 4 times that long if we had to write detailed explanations on why we gave the ratings.
Well Melissa, that is horrible and depressing and crazy. All the more reason for a sophisticated software program to handle it - software programs don't get exhausted and they could spend more time per hub in order to generate a detailed report. -- Seriously, that is awful. I am surprised some of you aren't jumping out the nearest window in frustration. I would be.
Now think about it this way -- three minutes per hub times my three hubs. So after nine (9) minutes of rapid-fire evaluation, I spent almost four (4) hours making sure they would be approved at the next three minute review? Now, I think I am really angry. Not at you, but at the system. Hmmmmm.
Don't be too angry, we're a pretty well trained lot.
The problem is there isn't a computer program capable of telling whether a hub is useful or over-promotional. They can work on grammar... to some extent... but they can't tell whether something is readable or not. They really can't detect spun grammar either.
3 minutes is really all it takes to review a hub, unless it's a huge beast. That's an average btw... and takes into account the 150 word hubs as well.
In short, even the most sophisticated software program is still inferior to a human being when it comes to reading for substance and context. Google has the most sophisticated "reading" algorithms on the planet... and still has human raters.
I also rate hubs through mturk. It is actually a lot of fun, as long as the pay is right. To get paid to read what others are putting up on HP is one of my top three favorite jobs on mturk.
They use Mturk. So a lot of our hubs are manually reviewed at a pretty affordable priced. One thing to know about MTURK is that a lot of the workers are grammar nazis. I don't know if that is your issue as your writing seems sound to me. That chart that everyone is talking about is what they use to grade us. If you go hub hop and mouse over the three categories, you will see the general questions you need to ask yourself.
I have been frustrated with HP for some time, now it's even worse. Two of my favorite hubs have been unpublished. I deleted obout 20 the other day and forgot that when you delete a hub you lose the points. I lost over 10,000 points. All of this trouble and work is not worth the pitiful $8 or $9 a month. I can do that at textbroker in half a day. I'm really getting ready to disappear.
I'm sorry I'm not considered a professional writer if I was I wouldn't be writing for HP. I make a lot more money with Amazon kindle. It's bad when you have to be embarrassed to tell people you write on HubPages.
Ok, I've seen this kind of quote before and I just have to ask--what are the levels about and how do you know what level you are? Levels of what?!
It would have been nice to have had this scoring rubric when I began "hubbing."
It's been in the learning center for quite some time...
This will help with setting up different capsules (adding pictures and subheadings)
Here is one place to find public domain images:
I linked directly to the Christian search, because that's what most of your hubs are on.
I'll see if I can scare up some more direct search links for you.
Edit: Here's another direct search link to some religious images
http://pixabay.com/en/photos/?q=christi … mage_type=
OK, I looked at some of your hubs. You don't have pictures, tables, videos and such. Are the ones not being featured like this? Part of what we are graded on is the media. A lack of photos, tables, videos and other items like that is probably a part of the issue.
The hubs that I can see are all quite short. Could that be the case ?
I would recommend making your hubs more of an 'experience' versus just straight text. If possible, add an image or two. but, for your niche that could be challenging. You can spruce up the fonts with bolding, text enlargement and spacing. Also, adding referable opinions on what specific verses mean would be interesting. Based on your large amount of hubs, I know you have the dedication to make these truly amazing. Make it fun and personal!
I am new to graphics. How do I add images to my hubs? Where can I find appropriate ones for my "niche"? As for bolding, I remember sending my first hub and having it returned with the comment that I should not "bold" my text. What do you mean by "text enlargement"? Should I write in a larger font than Arial 12? Please explain what you mean by spacing? Does not the program automatically make the text single-spaced? I do include the "referable opinons" of various scholars on some occasions; perhaps you did not read a hub with one of those comments.
All my hubs are featured. I simply follow the little box thats in the top right hand corner when you're creating hubs. The box tells you a minimum of 700 words, three high quality images, and some type of poll, table, video, or link. I simply make sure I have most of those requirements and that my spelling and grammar is outstanding. Subdivide topics into different text capsules or subdivide paragraphs into different text capsules. And if relevant, add headings to each section.
Featured today- Gone tomorrow!
I deeply resent my hub "Researching Old Military Photos" being continually unfeatured! That hub is a very valuable resource to genealogy researchers! If it's not good enough for HP then neither is the rest of my work. No other updates for 44 hours?! I'm getting out while I can HP is crashing.
These are helpful links - thanks!
Any samples of a Perfect 10???
Sometimes we think our work is good when in fact it is not. You would need an unbiased opinion to get a good assessment of your articles that are not featured.
Did you write a minimum of 700 words and 1-3 pictures? Hubs with fewer words or pictures can be featured as long as they are constantly being viewed and commented on.
Also, HP wants you to use their capsules, as much as possible, to break up the article. Articles written in one or two long paragraphs are generally not chosen. If you break your articles up into logical sections, then HP will usually be happy.
If they are creative writing hubs, then all bets are off. I have no idea what HP is looking for other than pictures and popularity. I could be wrong, but it looks like HP is solely interested in articles that can be searched by internet search engines, and poetry and short stories don't have advertising value and SEO/keyword weight.
I don't think that the staff is reviewing your Hubs. It is an automated computer system and works in conjunction with the Hub Hopper. My guess is that if you hit the minimums (there is a prompt in the upper right corner when writing a hub), break up your hub, write a summary, and grammar/spell check aren't too ticked off, it's an automatic feature. My contention is that the marginal hubs are peer reviewed through the Hub Hopper.
HP needs to change with the times to stay competitive in the market. It may be crazy around here, for a few months, while they are sorting out these new changes, but I believe they are good and will continue to uphold our stellar reputation in the eyes of the public.
I'd be happy to check out a few of your unfeatured hubs and see if there is any way to get them up into the spotlight. On your profile page you have an option to still show hubs that didn't make the cut. There is a slider at the bottom of your edit profile page.
by lizstevens3 weeks ago
For those who are no newbie to HUB Pages you probably share the same frustrations of working for hours on a hub only to be insulted with the friendly heads up message sending you back to a tutorial about writing rich...
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 Carolee Samuda22 months ago
So I'm replying to a comment on my hub and upon scrolling through the hub (I always check for errors or how I can improve), I see the related hubs section. There are five hubs there including one of mine. What...
by Gemini Fox24 months ago
Published a hub on Oklahoma (please don’t get started on how it might be too generic – I had fun doing it). It became the template for my following hubs on Arizona and New Mexico. The Oklahoma...
by Gemini Fox2 years ago
Had never done a “sales” hub before so decided to try. Have tweaked and tweaked this hub but it still keeps on being not featured due to quality. Getting a little T’d . . ....
by Susie Lehto21 months ago
I am being challenged. I have been having a problem getting a new hub to be featured. It has gone through QAP three times already. It is a new day, and I am feeling up to the challenge once again. Rested and refreshed...
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.