jump to last post 1-8 of 8 discussions (17 posts)

Why can't HupPages see these are good links

  1. Chuck Bluestein profile image87
    Chuck Bluesteinposted 22 months ago

    HubPages say the following links are bad. Why can't they see that they are good links from the PubMed Central that is part of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.

    Here are some of them:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2629072/

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2673798/

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2769828/

    1. Millionaire Tips profile image87
      Millionaire Tipsposted 22 months ago in reply to this

      I doubt there is anything wrong with these particular links.  The problem is probably that you have more than two links going to a particular website.  That's not allowed, probably because if you have to link to them more than twice, you are probably getting too much information from them, and maybe at risk of duplicating their work.  Try finding another source that gives information about the same topic.

      1. Venkatachari M profile image82
        Venkatachari Mposted 22 months ago in reply to this

        Yes, Millionaire points are correct. Giving too many links to the same website can be bad or spam links. You may choose only one of the above 3 links and put some other links from other sites. There are many govt. health department sites for public health awareness from US and UK.

    2. Matthew Meyer profile image78
      Matthew Meyerposted 22 months ago in reply to this

      Are you talking about these links showing as broken?
      If so, that is due to the header information that is returned by the server.

      For the first URL it reports HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently  &  HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found

      Sometimes links work when you click them as they forward or redirect, but all we can do is check the page and see what is returned by the server.

      You can use a site like this one to check the HTTP header returned.
      http://httpheadercheck.com/

      1. Venkatachari M profile image82
        Venkatachari Mposted 22 months ago in reply to this

        I think it is not a question of broken links. It's about the permissibility of links in a post. I, along with some others, are saying that 3 links to a same website cannot be allowed at hubpages. So, Chuck Bluestein should consider linking to some other sites dealing with same topic instead of all three links to the same site.

        1. makingamark profile image70
          makingamarkposted 22 months ago in reply to this

          I disagree - you want to link to the best sources of information.

          The fundamental point is that this is NOT a Google rule - this is a HubPages rule.

          1. Venkatachari M profile image82
            Venkatachari Mposted 22 months ago in reply to this

            I already mentioned that it is not allowed at Hubpages only. Further, I didn't say I am agreeing to it. I am only mentioning that Hubpages may  not agree to the 3 links to a same site and that's why it is considered as bad links.

  2. Sam Montana profile image86
    Sam Montanaposted 22 months ago

    What do you mean HP sees these as bad links?

    As a health writer for many years now, I always back up my articles with links like these. These are the authoritative links for medical and or health articles when citing studies.

    1. makingamark profile image70
      makingamarkposted 22 months ago in reply to this

      Exactly - HubPages is obviously not interested in accreditation to authoritative links. I have the exact same problem when writing in my field - which is why my content is slowly exiting this site.

  3. Chuck Bluestein profile image87
    Chuck Bluesteinposted 22 months ago

    Since it said that they were bad links and were not, I just clicked IGNORE and got rid of them.

  4. makingamark profile image70
    makingamarkposted 22 months ago

    Let me assure you that my blogs and websites elsewhere have more than two links to the same websites and Google has never ever thought my sites are bad. Quite the reverse Google sends them lots of traffic!

    For example:
    * My blog gets a feature on Google's search pages and has just passed 8 million page views.
    * My blog posts frequently rank on page 1 of Google and that's because I've got 'authority' in Google's eyes and that's because I write informative posts.

    I write for the reader not SEO and it's never done me any harm (apart from the scammers - which is why it's on a very short feed and I 'take no prisoners' when it comes to copyright infringement - reporting sites straight to Google)

    My websites for content removed from HubPages (unpublished because of the two links limit) have quadrupled their traffic - mainly via Google searches - since I created informative pages on my new sites. These often link to the same websites more than twice

    The two links minimum is one of the reasons why HubPages is losing good content.

    Authors know that this is NOT a rule imposed by Google - it's a rule invented by HubPages.

  5. psycheskinner profile image82
    psycheskinnerposted 22 months ago

    If the sight is an authoritative source you can ask for it to be white-listed and the 2 links rule will no longer apply.

    One way or another you have to comply with the rule whether you agree with it or not.

    1. makingamark profile image70
      makingamarkposted 22 months ago in reply to this

      You mean ask HubPages for their gracious permission to list a site that I might want to make more than two links to

      OR remove my content and put it on my own site where I have direct feedback from Google (e.g. quadruple traffic) as to whether or not they think this "no more than two links to one domain rule" made up by HubPages has any relevance to them?

      Guess which has more appeal?

  6. AliciaC profile image94
    AliciaCposted 22 months ago

    I think that Matthew has given the right information and that there may be a misunderstanding in this thread. I don't think that Chuck meant that he included all of his links in the same hub. I've experienced the same problem with the site that he mentions and I never include more than two links to the same site in my hubs (except for links to white-listed sites). The links are reported as broken when they appear to work.

  7. Chuck Bluestein profile image87
    Chuck Bluesteinposted 22 months ago

    They were different articles.  They are no longer there, since I told to ignore them. Here is what it said:

    Most Hubs are checked for broken links within 1-2 minutes after being edited. Due to technical limitations, a small percentage Hubs will not be rechecked right away. If you correct a broken link but still see a warning, it is probably because your Hub has not been rechecked by our systems. Please note that clicking the "retest" button may not get rid of the link, because it only checks whether a link is valid or not. If this happens, don't be alarmed — your Hub will be rechecked eventually, but it may take up to a couple of months. Keep in mind that your readers are unaffected by this as the updated link will be shown in the live Hub.

    1. makingamark profile image70
      makingamarkposted 22 months ago in reply to this

      If you got that message - yes, it's irritating, but when you correct a link and/or replace it with a better one (e.g. because the source updated their website and forgot to do their redirects) it doesn't immediately appear on HubPages as correct.

      Try refreshing your page and/or clearing your cache.

      The test I use is wait until the next day then sort my hubs using the Change column so that those most recently changed are at the top - and then I check whether the broken link sign has gone.

      You'll find that almost always the labelling of a hub with broken links disappears with either a refresh or waiting a day.

      Now and again HubPages gets stuck on a broken link that doesn't exist. That's when you call in the tech help! smile

  8. Chuck Bluestein profile image87
    Chuck Bluesteinposted 22 months ago

    I tested one that was said to be bad using the header test. I guess it is OK. They were there years before HP said they were bad.

    Server Resp : HTTP/1.1 200 OK
    Date : Fri, 04 Sep 2015 02:34:32 GMT
    Server : Apache
    Cache-Control : private
    NCBI-SID : F4FC743E5E903381_0102SID
    Content-Type : text/html; charset=UTF-8
    Set-Cookie : pmc.article.report=; domain=.nih.gov; path=/; Max-Age=31536000
    Vary : Accept-Encoding
    X-UA-Compatible : IE=Edge
    Connection : close

 
working