I had a Hub published about two years ago. The score on it was 83 and it received fairly good traffic.
I recently edited it to add some additional info and a website for that info. That made two external links related to my research. As soon as I edited the Hub, it went back for review, and has been unfeatured since them.
I removed the new text and the related website, I took out one Amazon link, leaving only one. It is still unfeatured.
I don't know what else to do. Suggestions? Thanks.
http://mary615.hubpages.com/hub/A-Compa … d-Wrappers
103 comments is impressive! While there is nothing wrong with your title, when faced with a hub being unfeatured, examine everything - starting at the top.
I would suggest trying to fine tuning your title to something more eye-catching or interactive.
"Wave of the Future: Edible Food Wrappers And Beverage Bottles!"
"How Edible Food Wrappers And Beverage Bottles Are Coming To A Store Near You"
"How Edible Food Wrappers And Beverage Bottles Will Affect You!"
Something to make a reader curious.
This is just a suggestion and by no means am I an expert at fine tuning titles, but sometimes a change of title brings new attention (and meets with HP approval lol).
Even after you fine tune a title or make text changes of any kind, waiting another 24 hours is still possible.
Thanks, Rachel. I never thought of changing the title! I will consider your suggestion; it is a good one.
I have links to all of my photos I use not mine but don't make them linkable. Maybe you could try that first.
I recommend you put back in everything you took out. They all add value to the Hub and they had nothing to do with it failing QAP, I'm sure.
Your Hub is unFeatured for the following reasons:
You link out to monosol.com three times - your photo credits count towards the limit (and I suggest you read my Hub on doing photo credits - you'll find it in the slider on my profile).
You have a link to a Solar Path Hub. That may be environmentally friendly, but it's not sufficiently related so is against the rules.
Your title is too long - I'd get rid of the second sentence.
Thank you, Marisa. I linked to the solar path Hub because of the environmental value, I will remove that. I will also delete the photo credit to Monosol, and will change my Title.
everything looks fine to me, try adding polls, change the video and add in new pictures
I checked out your hub. I saw nothing wrong with it. I'm definitely starting to get nervous about updating hubs...
Thanks a bunch, paradigmsearch! I stripped it down to it's original content, etc. and it is still unfeatured. I will not update any more Hubs! I will leave well enough alone. As soon as you edit a Hub, it goes right to QAP!
You link out to monosol 3 times. I would get rid of the 2nd photo source link as it's not needed. I would also go through the hub and try to decrease the number of times monosol is repeated.
It's an interesting hub! I've never heard of this company, but it looks like you're getting hit for overly promotional.
So sorry about this, and rebekahELLE, may be right about the links. HP does have a rule about not using a certain ones more than twice, as it will be considered over promotional. Or using a certain word a lot too. I do not update over the weekends either, as HP will not update until Monday.
I was going to mention the three links as well. Also the link to her other hub was unrelated and -through no fault of her own, I'm sure, there is an unrelated ebay product for t-shirts. The amazon product is a weak relation as well.
You may just be right, I'll check that Amazon product, and the links to Monosol. Thanks, guys!
I just read your hub for the second time. You might try changing the title. Also the Ebay capsule is not related to the topic. Having said this, I found this article fascinating.
vocalcoach, thank for reading the Hub. I removed the Ebay capsule and replaced it with an Amazon link showing where one can buy candy in an edible wrapping. I'l work on the Title if it remains unfeatured. This is the original Title when it was featured.
Question for rebekahELLE and MelissaBarrett regarding links: Does that overly-promotional theory appy to links used in photo captions, giving credit to the site and photographer? I have several hubs where I found all or most of the photos on the same site. Could this be hurting those hubscores? I do recall Marisa Wright and Writer Fox suggesting that we don't put a link under every photo and put the credits at the end, maybe a link capsule. Please share your opinion.
Yes, the links in the photo captions are included in the two link limit. If you have numerous photos from the same site/photographer, you can't include more than two links to the same domain. The hub will be unfeatured, sometimes it may even be unpublished according to the LC entry about links, Rule 1.
Rule 1: Your Hub can have a maximum of 2 links to any one domain. Links in the image source field in the Photo Capsule count toward this limit.
The advice given by Marisa and WF sounds fine to me.
The LC also mentions keyword stuffing as an overly promotional violation and it will affect the hub/hubscore.
Keyword stuffing, or over-use of a certain word or phrase to the point that it detracts from the readability of your Hub, will also result in moderation as Overly Promotional. This can mean repeatedly emphasizing words or phrases in bold, italics, or with hyperlinks,
I remember seeing a video by Matt Cutts about the limits for repeating words and he did not give a clear response, stating only that we should try not to reuse words any more than is necessary to keep the "flow of language" going comfortably. Responses like this leave all of us in limbo, that's for sure.
It's hard. I have one that I had to go through carefully, but if the hub reads naturally with the recurrence of the word/phrase, it's fine. I don't see intentional keyword stuffing in hubs hardly at all anymore. In a hub which is focused on a company that makes a particular product, as in Mary's, I can see where one has to be extra careful with repeating the name and linking to the company site itself.
I did not even think about the photo with the same domains! So, I guess it does not matter if they are from freedigital photos dot com, etc., and we have to go somewhere to find good/legal photos.
Or source it in the text box without making it an active link
But I thought it had to be an active link, per HP policy regarding "stellar hubs," worthy of HOTD, and all that jazz.
Does sourcing it in a text box mean, "photo of the red rose by mary from pixabay" and the url?
Photo credits have nothing at all to do with stellar Hubs. It's simply a matter of complying with copyright law.
If the licence on your photo doesn't require a hyperlink there is no need to give one. The CC licence generally does require a link - but Pixabay, for instance, needs no attribution at all. So for safety's sake you could put "Pixabay" as the name of the source, but don't put the URL in the source box.
Hmm. If this is true, me thinks I've using way too many links in photos, trying to follow misunderstood or confusing rules. Im going to go eat now.
This is exactly why I use Pixabay.com and Morguefile.com...they do not require accreditation, are free to use, are public domain photos and are great pix. I edit them with Picmonkey, which is also free if you stick to the basic edit designs.
I use pixabay, morgueFile, freedigitalphotos, and photopin. I was under the impression that even though they are free, we still needed to credit the photographer with an active link. I guess not. Seems I've been here before and still can't seem to get it right. Ho hum.
This just illustrates why you need to read the conditions on the website, not rely on what other people tell you!
Pixabay does not require attribution. Morguefile does not require attribution but it asks you to attribute out of courtesy.
Freedigitalphotos has the following requirements:
http://www.freedigitalphotos.net/images … gement.php
Photopin just collects photos from Flickr, so you don't credit Photopin, you need to credit the original photo on Flickr. Flickr is exempt from the limit on links so you can do as many credits as you need.
Thank you very much, Marisa. I wish I had time to read the basics, let alone the specifics. You are so gracious and patient with us who overlook good advice. One of these days when I have time to commit to being a full-time online writer, I'll make time to figure it all out.
Some common photo sites are exempt from the rule - Flickr, for instance.
Okay, head spinning now. I did edit two hubs about an hour ago to heed the rule. I'll see tomorrow if it made a difference. I had too many links to photopin and pixabay . . . Or maybe not! I don't know.
Marisa, if I use my Flickr pictures in the hub, no matter how many, they are exempt.
Hi Faith. I have one hub in particular that features lots of photos from freedigital. I give them credit, as they require, but don't provide an active link. That hub seems to be doing just fine, so maybe you should try it.
Source: Photo by Author Name / freedigitalphotos.net
Yes, links to photo sources also count! I know this because I once had that problem, myself.
I just want to thank everyone who joined in this discussion. I have learned a lot from your suggestions. It was just such a surprise to find an old Hub that was performing well to be placed as unfeatured after I edited with new content.
GOOD NEWS! I changed the Title, removed the active links where I found photos, (I had used three), I removed the new info which I thought really added to the article, and removed the source of the company who is making these edible food container ( had referred to them three times). Maybe this was overpromotional.
This has been a learning experience for me. I guess I've been lucky not to have had an featured Hub before. I would like to remind you as soon as you hit that EDIT, the Hub will go back to QAP to be checked for quality!
Thanks for taking the time to help me with this!!
Mary615 I would not be afraid of editing because of this experience. The truth is that the edits caught problems that were there all the time. Yes, new edits go through the QAP, but as long as you follow the guidelines, editing presents no problems. I just spent months editing every single hub and all passed QAP...however, I am very careful about sticking to the rules. I have found that edits greatly improve my articles, so I would not be afraid to use them.
Interesting discussion with a lot of helpful tips. I saw your hub, Mary, and it was fascinating. Hope it gets featured again. I also learned the hard way about two links to the same source.
Yes, thanks to all the great suggestions, the Hub is now featured once again.
I think once the hub is featured then don't touch it anymore. Better try some other means to get traffic.
by qeyler6 weeks ago
I've been writing here for quite a few years, I go back to the ancient era before the 'featured' 'not featured' declension.I have found that 'fixing' a Hub which is not featured is a total waste of time, as in a day or...
by William F Torpey14 months ago
HubPages has unfeatured my hub titled "History Often Depends on Who Writes It" obviously because of links they allege are unrelated to the topic. I vehemently disagree with that assessment. I therefore will...
by TIMETRAVELER22 years ago
Someone recently stated that there are limits to how much you can link to your own hubs. Does anybody know the limitations?
by Rosheda Stephenson7 months ago
Every hub I have ever written was immediately published. My most recent hub keeps getting unfeatured even after several fixes. I have edited, clarified etc but just can't seem to figure out exactly what to fix. Just to...
by Nathan Bernardo2 years ago
On a different account, somewhat "experimental" account, one of my Hubs is unfeatured. Generally my inclination was to unpublish it and move it or just delete it. But I kept it and put it in a Hub group....
by Ceres Schwarz2 years ago
I have this hub that has always been featured ever since it was published on HubPages. Then, seemingly all of a sudden, it was unfeatured for quality. I tried to fix it but it’s still unfeatured. I know it’s not...
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.