After reading the latest new rule about spam, perusing the forums, and seeing my individual hubscores and hubscore average continue to go way down, I've concluded that my biggest problem may be too many photo links. My ad capsules are minimal. HP vets and staff, please give a look-see at a few of my hubs and help me determine what I need to do. Keep photo captions and descriptions (source, photographer, etc) and delete hyperlinked urls?
I will try to do 2 hubs a day to start cleansing my subdomain. So tired and frustrated, for real. Want to write new hubs and not repeat same mistakes. Not looking forward to getting penalized every time I make an edit to improve. Thanks in advance.
I'm not at all sure that's fair assumption. Flickr is already on the whitelist so can't cause any problems.
I looked at one or two Hubs at random and see that you still have one or two photos credited to Photopin, which means they must be incorrect - all Photopin photos are from Flickr, and should be credited to the photographer at Flickr, not Photopin (also be careful to credit Flickr not Flicker, as "Flicker" is not on the whitelist!). I doubt those minor issues would affect your HubScore, though.
Are you sure your HubScores are dropping due to quality issues, or could it just be that HubScores are going through another change generally?
I thought it might be another change but when I look at most of my hubs, I thought it might have something to do with links.
I'm not sure why they're dropping, Marisa. But to give you an idea of why I'm perplexed, I have 75 hubs. Until the latest change rolled out, between 27 and 33 of my hubs stayed at 90 and above, around 3 to 4 in the 60s. Now I have 8 hubs above 90 and 10+ in the 60s. Weird.
janshares: Where are you getting your photos? I exclusively use photos from Morguefile and Pixabay because they do not require accreditation. Once in awhile, when I have no other choice, I use Wikimedia Commons. Between the three of them and the editing tool Picmonkey.com, I am able to get more than enough photos. I also have special permission from one RV site to use theirs as well. This way I never have to worry about overly promotional pix.
I just took a look at your Easy Fruit Salad article and counted way too many photos from one source. They are beautiful, but there are too many of them. You can find similar ones on Morguefile and Pixabay and still use two from Janis Evans.
Isn't it better to use our own? Not sure what it's "better " for but I thought it made it more authentic and less use of links. I dunno.
I was not aware those were your own photos. If so, then they are fine to use.
Another option would be to suggest your preferred photo source for whitelisting.
Sorry psycheskinner, I'm clueless as to what you said. Is whitelisting like making a separate text capsule to list all photo sources? Without links? I'm less than savvy when it comes to online writing terminology and technique.
Whitelisting is when you ask for a site to be exempt from the two-link limit. It gets added to a list by hubpages that means those links will not cause you any more problems. Generally this means showing the site is an important resource in good standing like wikimedia.
IMHO, what needs to happen, is for HP to stop penalizing photo credit links (which are often mandatory from some public domain sites), as "promotional."
I'm sorry, but it is not "promotional" to simply give credit to a photo source. Promotional means "hey, click here, go to this site and buy something." At least in my book..that's what it means, and what I understand it to mean per HP rules....
Wikimedia and Flickr are already on the white list, and some others are as well. Public domain sites like Pixabay do not require any attribution at all.
Understood, but I cannot always find the type of image I am looking for on those sites; Wikimedia, in particular, gives me navigation fits...I seem to always end up on a page that simply defines what that site is; and no photos.
So, sometimes, I just google "public domain photo blah-blah subject" and on those sites, there are definitely some that say that the photo is public domain, but a link back is mandatory.
Also, even if there is 'no attribution required,' I thought (understood) it was always best to play the "CYA" game.
All of the photo links should be marked 'NoFollow." Unfortunately, HP doesn't provide a way to do this. It is doubtful that a photo link is relevant to the Hub's subject. As an alternative, you can give a NoFollow photo credit in a text box underneath a photo or at the end of the Hub text.
As to 'promotional', people actually do put promotional links in the Photo capsules, so HP does need some sort of rule that covers all bases.
I believe they already have changed photo capsule links to "No Follow"
I was delighted when I read that. However, it's not true. Some are and some aren't. For instance, the link in this photo capsule is Followed:
http://dzymslizzy.hubpages.com/hub/Poem … ilight-Man
That's a link to someone else's Hub, and it's Followed!
I think that's because it's an internal link?
The point is, that link goes to another Hubber's Profile page, which means that it is irrelevant to the subject of Dzymslizzy's Hub, but there is no way for her to NoFollow that link. Google will consider that to be a spam link. There still needs to be an option in the photo capsule to NoFollow links.
Very good point, I thought it was to a Hub not a profile. I can see why HubPages is allowing internal links to be followed, perhaps the solution in that case is for the writer to provide a link in the text (e.g. "Thanks to ..... for the photo of the ..." at the end of the Hub)
I see it a lot on great hubs with lots of original photos, where the person links each photo to their profile page with their name as source.
It seems redundant to me. And, maybe spammy?
Yes; that link was used by permission of the original Hub author, but I thought I understood that the "promotional" issue was applied only to external links, not those that led to another Hub within HP.
(And I'm curious; how did you manage to pull that up so fast, out of 300 hubs??? You obviously know techie tricks I do not. LOL)
In that case, SheilaMilne, according to that post, then there should be no issue remaining with "overly promotional" for photo credit URLs
So, based on this feedback, do I really need to start deleting all photo links? I understand that the photo sites have different rules, some not requiring attribution. But what HP requires seems to change based on the latest updates in QAP standards or algorithms, understandably to improve the site, please Google, etc.
No, don't delete all photo links. Your Flickr links are correct, IF you've created them correctly (quite a few of them have "Flicker" not "Flickr" which creates a broken link - which could be a problem in itself). It would be illegal to remove links if they are required.
Wikimedia Commons is white-listed so they are not a problem either. I am not sure which other photo sites are whitelisted, maybe someone else can advise. What other sites have you used?
You don't need to worry about "no follow" - external photo credits are already no follow.
I'm not sure why your scores are changing but I notice mine have changed a lot recently too. Hubs which used to be at the bottom of my account page are now at the top! Remember, scores don't matter - so try to pay no attention to them. The only thing you should worry about is traffic, and scores don't affect that in any way.
Will do, Marisa. I need to make time to follow through and fix what needs fixing. I mainly use Pixabay, photopin, morguefile, a few from freedigital. Nothing is coming up "broken links." For the most part I do ignore hubscores but the timing of this latest change regarding ads and spam made me curious as to what was happening. Thanks for your help.
You may have noticed that people who have spam issues are getting a warning that their Hub looks "spammy". If you're not getting that warning then you don't have to worry.
Do remember that Photopin is not a photo site. It's just an easy way for writers to find Flickr photos and it's the photographer on Flickr that you need to credit, not Photopin.
I just made edits to 17 hubs by removing links from public domain and free photos, as well as some info links and ads. Also corrected a couple misspelled sources including Flickr (thanks, Marisa). I recorded the hubscores to see what happens. Will keep you posted. Thanks, everyone, for your help.
Now up to 30 hubs edited. Definitely seeing a difference, most hubscores on the increase. Just to update the issue, I thought the HP rule was that all photos were to have the url hyperlinked under the photo to show the source. I had links under all public domain and free photos. I'm deleting them all which is improving my subdomain in general, I hope.
Posting any photo URL link is optional on HP. However, you should observe the proper attribution required by the copyright holder if the image is not yours. Public domain photos and photos free to use without attribution should never be linked (unless, of course, you want it to be a Hub of the Day).
That's the rule, the HOTD requirement that made me put the hyperlinks in when I first came to HP. I just stuck to the rule. I did keep the hyperlinks for proper attribution to photographers names and the CC BY 2.0 photos. Do I need to?
If the copyright holder requires a link to a website or to a creative commons licence page, then you do have to give a link.
I think I am going to stick with using my own photos.
The good old "keep it simple" method.
Personally, I would leave links in attributions to photos. It is a good record of where I got the image and is a nice way to payback the person for the use of their image. There is no intent to be spammy, and it doesn't seem to cause problems in my hubs. I try to take most of my own photos, but otherwise get images from Flickr going through creativecommons.org.
Thanks for your input, Millionaire Tips. If this ends up backfiring, I do have every single url link in my files so I can put them back. I do use a lot of my own photos in many hubs which I prefer to do. I also give credit and cc attribution to photographers/photos that require it. However, I'm the process of making some corrections in that regard. Some of them I left the url hyperlink, some I did not.
I think if the public domain photos had a photographer, I left the photograher's name to acknowledge him but took out the hyperlink.
I had no idea HP penalized photo credit links (which are mandatory from public domain sites), as "promotional."
I have recently began writing here, I did a lot of reading through the years... this is one thing I did not know.
It is rude to not credit the photographer.
There is a limit of two links to any one site, and some people do try to get around that rule by using extra links in the photo source box. To get around it, I just either use only the whitelisted sites like Flickr and Wikimedia, or make sure that I only use two or fewer photos from any one site. I always give a link as a thank you for the image.
Photos which are in the Public Domain do NOT require a photo credit or a link. Being in the Public Domain means that there is no copyright.
To use photos which require a photo credit by the copyright holder, just limit yourself to two photos from the same website, or use photos without a photo credit limit on HubPages such as Wikipedia or Flickr.
by Valerie Bloom2 years ago
I'm just getting my Hub-legs as I'm making my way over from Squidoo, and I appreciate your help.It seems that I have to fix a lot of photo credits that did not format correctly in the transition. (Drat!)Most of the...
by Jean Bakula6 hours ago
When our hubs were once chosen, we had a way to see what was supposed to be fixed before it appeared on a niche site. Now I don't see anything like that. It could be me, but there was a way to see what they wanted added...
by Bryce4 years ago
Every time I upload a pic and read the message that the pic link counts in my hub links I get the impression that my hubs could get penalized. I went through the learning Center and the FAQ and I did a few searches...
by Celina Martin3 years ago
Just wondering, is it necessary to mention source link while using photos from search engines. And, if I do will it be beneficial for my hub or not?
by Jemuel3 years ago
Hello fellow hubbers! I just want to know if I violated the rules in HP regarding over promotional on hubs. I usually have images from freedigitalphotos.net cause aside from the fact that they offer free photos, I...
by Jean Bakula2 weeks ago
Has anyone at Hubpages ever received a bill for using an Artist's work or a Photographer's Photo on a a hub? And if so, how much? I'm curious, because I've written to artists about twenty five times during my time...
Copyright © 2016 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.