jump to last post 1-7 of 7 discussions (21 posts)


  1. Titus2Homemaker profile image60
    Titus2Homemakerposted 2 years ago

    Seriously?!  More than two links to Pinterest is "overly promotional"?  C'mon, Hubpages, can we please move into 2014?  My links to Pinterest weren't even SLIGHTLY promotional - they're informational.

    Saying that three links to Pinterest's domain is "overly promotional" is like saying that three separate Google searches are overkill.

    1. randomcreative profile image93
      randomcreativeposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      More than two links to any site is going to get flagged as overly promotional. I write a lot of articles about DIY / crafts and run into the same issues with Pinterest and Etsy. It's just something that you have to work around.

      1. Thelma Alberts profile image81
        Thelma Albertsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Thank you randomcreative for the information. I have forgot about that because I have sent more than 2 links on Pinterest and other sites.

    2. Jayne Lancer profile image90
      Jayne Lancerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Such rules are in place because HubPages has moved into 2014!!!

      1. NateB11 profile image93
        NateB11posted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I totally agree. Excessively backlinking can damage a site if it's done in a way just to get backlinks and it's been a problem for sites in the past that have allowed it. I'd rather HP had a rule against links than have people loading up Hubpages with backlinks that adversely affect the site. This is post-Penguin, indeed; the old way was to allow backlinks and that's what got so many sites in trouble with Google.

  2. relache profile image88
    relacheposted 2 years ago

    HubPages has been firm on the outgoing link policy for YEARS.  You may wish to familiarize yourself with this one.


  3. psycheskinner profile image82
    psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago

    If you want to suggest adding them to the whitelist you can do that in the problems/suggestions forum.

    1. kerbev profile image75
      kerbevposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Is any portion of this whitelist public?

      1. calculus-geometry profile image86
        calculus-geometryposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        They don't have a list of what is explicitly exempt from the 2-max rule, but on this help page http://hubpages.com/learningcenter/publ … d_22732854  it says:

        If you have created a Hub simply to procure backlinks, your Hub will most likely be moderated. HubPages allows two links to one domain, including image source links. Links to well-known resources like Wikipedia, news sites, etc., are not held to this same standard.

        so, wikipedia is explicitly exempt.  I think maybe cnn.com and mayoclinic.org are exempt as well, but don't quote me on that.

        1. Marisa Wright profile image92
          Marisa Wrightposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Flickr is also exempt.

  4. LotusLandry profile image61
    LotusLandryposted 2 years ago

    I just hit this two link limit on Pinterest on a very long Hub.  These were not any of my pins.  I got around  the restriction by just saying that the item is 'portrayed on Pinterest' -  leaving the reader with the burden of searching for the picture.

    1. Marisa Wright profile image92
      Marisa Wrightposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      If you're linking to photos on Pinterest, I'd be worried.   Did you check who the photo belonged to?  Are you sure the person who pinned it has the right to share it?   When you post a photo from ANY photo site, you need to check that you're able to use it legally here, and make sure you credit the photographer.

  5. lisavollrath profile image88
    lisavollrathposted 2 years ago

    If an item is posted on Pinterest, it's posted somewhere else. Why not just link to the original source?

    In my view, the two link rule is a good one, especially for sites link Pinterest, which do nothing but aggregate content that's available elsewhere. Why not give your readers more diverse resources? Once they've visited Pinterest, they know it exists, and will probably figure out how to search there. Sending them to blogs and web sites they might not have heard from except through your hub might increase their interest in your other articles more than sending them to the same sites over and over again.

    My two cents. Your mileage may vary.

    1. Titus2Homemaker profile image60
      Titus2Homemakerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      It isn't always.  Usually, but not always.  Sometimes a website goes defunct and the Pin is still available but the site is not.  (Seems to have been the case with one of the links I had in my Hub.)  And Pinners can upload images directly to Pinterest, as well.

    2. TIMETRAVELER2 profile image94
      TIMETRAVELER2posted 2 years ago in reply to this

      How do you find the original source of a photo that appears on PInterest?  I did not know that people who post there include this info.

      1. Millionaire Tips profile image88
        Millionaire Tipsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Pinterest is a bookmarking site.  If you click on the photo, it will show you a larger photo with the website listed below. If you click on the photo again, it will take you to the page that it appears on.  I agree that it is better to link to the original source and save the reader the extra time of clicking twice to get to the original.

  6. celebassistant profile image84
    celebassistantposted 2 years ago

    Maybe the policy will change in the future.  You will have to present a good case for it.  As Marisa stated, you need to give photo credit.

    There is software that exists now for the express purpose of finding duplicate photos online.  It's quite instant.

    So, in other words, copyright owners can see who is using their photos and you could, possibly, get your hub deleted if they submitted a copyright complaint to the HP staff.

    P.S. It doesn't matter if if edit the photo or change it's color because the scanning software picks up patterns in the photo.  It's just like reading (digital) fingerprints.

    1. lisavollrath profile image88
      lisavollrathposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Google images does this. All you have to do is upload the original image, and it will search out all the instances of it online.

      1. celebassistant profile image84
        celebassistantposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Thanks for the info.  Another great resource is TinEye.  If you find an image online and you want to use it, scan it on TinEye and it will show you where it appeared first.  It's most likely going to be someplace like ShutterStock or something.  You can then legally buy it or ask the owner to use it for free (if you credit them).

  7. LindaSmith1 profile image61
    LindaSmith1posted 2 years ago

    TimeTraveler: Some are providing source such as Flickr.  I don't trust them if source is someones personal site or blog.

    1. Titus2Homemaker profile image60
      Titus2Homemakerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      I have come across some pins that are not linked the correct original destination.  (It's usually an oversight, I think.)  People will pin from a blog post while still on the main page of the blog, and then once that post isn't on the main page anymore, the pin doesn't go to the right post. Or they'll click on an image from a website and pin it from there and the image's link gets connected to it from the post link.  It's technical ignorance more than anything else I think, most of the time.

      But if you want to track down the original source, open the pin in one tab and images.google.com in another.  Then you can click the image in the pin (hold the mouse button) and drag it over to the other tab where you can drop it into the "drop image here" search spot.  And Google images will pull up all the pages it can find that use that picture.