My latest 'overly promotion' warning is for three thinks to research articles on http://link.springer.com/
This is a source of data I refer to, to back up scientific claims. I think it should be permitted?
I don't know, Psyche - every page I looked at (only a few) was an excerpt from a book they are trying to sell. Definitely a sales-oriented site, with the purpose being to sell books. That's pretty promotional...
It is peer-reviewed research that I use to show I am not making stuff up and facts is facts. Students would use their institutional accounts to access the full text.
I understand that, and maybe I'm way off base here. I just view any commercial site, selling stuff, as a potential problem when it is linked to. I kind of use that concept in defining "overly promotional" - whether HP does or not I'm not really sure.
I know we can link to newspapers, which definitely have ads, and I know we cannot link to Sears because it is nothing BUT ads. Somewhere in between, it seems, there is a line drawn as to what constitutes a "commercial" site as opposed to "informative". I don't think you could, for instance, link (three times) to ehow or squidoo even though they are informative articles; both have too many ads and their purpose is to sell.
Just my thoughts - only an HP moderator can tell you for sure.
If you think the site has been misclassified, feel free to contact the moderation team! They can at least reevaluate the site and give it another shot. I do not know what our specific requirements are, but there is a chance this site might be seen as being OK.
We reviewed the domain and it is primarily an ebook sales site.
It will be treated like other commercial sites.
It does seem ludicrous that posting non-affiliate links to a scientific paper published by a major international scientific publisher is considered over-promotional. To me it rather highlights the ignorance of whichever moderator made that decision. Obviously the person concerned has no knowledge of academic literature.
One potential way round would be to post links to the abstract in a public database, if such a resource exists for the subject area in question. For example, PubMed supplies a link to the full text on the publisher's site in addition to featuring the abstract. Thus the hub would take the reader to the abstract, and the abstract would show the way to the full text, if the reader had an institutional account with the publisher or was willing to pay to purchase the whole article.
Thanks for that suggestion. I guest I could find more of them in sciencedirect, which I think is already whitelisted.
The hub hasn't been moderated, just flagged--probably automatically
Actually, Springer Verlag is currently the second largest publisher in the world of academic journals after Elsevier. The company has been in existence since the mid-19th century.
So basically, you are saying it is not possible to give a live link within a citation of a scientific paper.
I am truly amazed.
If (IF!) I'm getting this right, from Matt's response, you are still welcome to give a link to a scientific paper. Just not to the publisher who will sell you that paper.
It isn't a prohibited site, so you can link to it.
It is simply limited to 2 per Hub for this as with other commercial sites.
Such is life. I understand if they don't want to us to link to any publishers. But I would hope any media company would realize Springer is a bit more than some website that sells ebooks.
But it has not real effect on me if I need to link to them in a secondary site and make people click one more time to get the primary reference.
Springer is most definitely a commercial enterprise. The money they make from publishing scientific papers is a scandal, given that most of the science is publicly funded.
Actually, Springer produces 350 open-access journals, which anyone can read for free. This is more than any other academic publisher.
Of course, one could always demand that public funds pay for free journals as well, then Springer, Elsevier and all the rest would wither away...
by Daedalu7 years ago
by Robert P6 years ago
Today I hopped a few hubs and as usual I flagged a lot of them for being overly promotional, for having two links to the same site. The breach of the rules was obvious. For example, in a hub on the subject of weight...
by Ben Guinter3 years ago
Can someone please explain this to me, as this hub was on HubPages for YEARS and saw a ton of traffic, but then I took it down... and only recently decided to bring it back, because I remember how helpful it was and how...
by Carl "Fitness"8 years ago
It would be very helpful for newbies if HubPages added some context-sensitive (inline) help links near the "ads" level setting drop down box on the settings tab for new hub posts. (That's where you set...
by Liz Elias3 days ago
Hello, Team!I just had a "positively brilliant" idea! It has long been said, and made known that Hub Pages is not particularly poetry friendly; that poems do better on poetry sites.Well, now--since your...
by Titus2Homemaker3 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...
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.