Published a hub on Oklahoma (please don’t get started on how it might be too generic – I had fun doing it). It became the template for my following hubs on Arizona and New Mexico. The Oklahoma one published just fine. The Arizona and New Mexico ones are now Not Featured due to Quality. Identical layout except for content!
I emailed HP re: this, pointing out this discrepancy, and got an email back (which did not address the discrepancy) but stated that I had:
1. “excessive” products in the hub. Per HubPages’ own help section:
“In order to maintain a standard of high quality, HubPages requires that every Hub contain 50 words per Amazon or eBay product, e.g., if you have three related Amazon products in your Hub, you need 150 original words.”
One of those hubs contains 1700 words and the other one, 1800, so I should, according to HubPages own instructions, be able to have at least 30 Amazon capsules in each. Since I previously attempted a product hub and put in way too many products and had the hub Not Featured due to Quality, I only put 10 Amazon capsules in this one! REALLY, HubPages?!
2. “unrelated” products in the hub. Per HubPages’ own help section:
“It seems obvious, but only include products that are directly referenced or recommended in your Hub. People are more likely to buy something if it is directly related to the subject of your Hub.”
So while I did not actually reference or recommend the products in the hubs, it really can’t get much more OBVIOUS that they’re related to the hub. All the Amazon products actually have the name of the state in each title! REALLY, HubPages?!
3. that these hubs had “large portions of bolded text.” What HubPages?! You mean sorta like you do in your own help section?! This is exactly what I did in my hub! It’s called graphic design!
• Hubs: Hubs are the topical articles that act as the building blocks of our community. Each Hub is a one-page topical resource created by a Hubber. Hubs are easy to make and can include anything from videos and maps to polls and quizzes.
• Earnings: HubPages splits revenue with Hubbers on an impressions basis from online advertisements (Google AdSense and HubPages' Ad Program). HubPages offers several different ways for you to earn from your Hubs, ranging from contextually-placed ads to Amazon and eBay products. We also host contests in which you can win anything from $10 to $500 in cash prizes. HubPages disburses earnings via the HubPages Earnings Program.
• Community interaction: While many people join HubPages hoping only to make money, even more stay because of the amazing community present on the site. We have an amazing group of supportive, passionate publishers who comment on each other's work and offer valuable feedback and encouragement.
• Educational Resources: Our FAQ, Learning Center, and Forums are great places to learn about online writing. Whether you are just getting started or looking to sharpen already strong online writing skills, we have a guide for you!
• Topical Communities: We have over 6,000 different Topic Communities on HubPages, complete with their own dedicated Forums and Answers pages.
• Answers: Our Answers feature allows you to ask and answer questions of interest.
• Forums: With over 6,000 Forums, we offer plenty of places to chat with other Hubbers. Want some feedback on your work? Check out the Improving Your Hub Forum!
4. and “could benefit from some layout and organization.” REALLY?! I guess I’ll let anyone who cares to go read those hubs go read them and then tell me if they’re “unorganized.”
5. and then to top this all off, I get some pithy little blurb about how I should "try to aim for an 8 or higher on this table” (link inserted). So now I’m really lost because as far as I can see by what is stated in the Informational Writing Scale table (the inserted link) my hubs should be an 8 or 10! And I have to assume that that table is somehow related to the” Goal Boxes” in the upper right hand corner of my hub (which shows when a hub is being edited) which makes it all the more strange because they’re all checked!
And all this after we constantly get HOTD with misspellings, hubbers winning $50.00 (and we all know how hard that is to come by around here!) for hubs that were literally incoherent in places and other hubbers winning accolades for ( ) Hubber Of The Year with hubs that have pixelated pictures – constantly!
What a complete joke!
This place was the first time I ventured on to the internet. It has taught me a lot. I really, really enjoy writing and creating hubs and making them look good! With a background in design that is important to me. But this is just getting NUTS! No surprise this place is circling the drain . . .
It sounds like you've missed a recent policy/rule change. See this blog post for more info.
This forum thread will help too.
Basically the rules have become much tighter when it comes to the insertion of products and links. Products just aren't appropriate on the hubs you've mentioned.
Thanks for trying to help, Susana S, but . . .
"Products just aren't appropriate on the hubs you've mentioned."
You're kidding, right?
Nope not kidding!
These are informational hubs that are most likely going to be visited by children looking for facts for their homework.... and they aren't going to be buying anything
You could try a product or two and see how it goes, but I could pretty much guarantee that these hubs won't make sales. And if they aren't the kind of hubs that will make sales then it's not worth having sales capsules displayed (this is what HP is trying to get at with their new policy).
Look at the pages already listed on google's first page for Montana state facts for example. Do any of them display products for sale? I think you'll find the answer is no and that's for a very good reason!
So my placing this hub under "Travel and Explore" means nothing . . . fascinating!
I only started using Amazon recently although I have been here for a little while and one of the things everyone tells newbies (which is what I feel like using Amazon) is that they should "experiment" with what works for them. That's precisely what these hubs were for me, an experiment.
Results so far: not good . . .
Just put "Montana Travel" into google and got ads! Ok, so maybe change title to include something about travel . . .
Montana travel has a different search intent behind it. Searchers typing that in
are most likely actually in the process of planning a trip, and that is reflected in the sites listed in the search results for that phrase.
Just wondering if you made an update to include travel or explore as the topic/category and if it helped?
I find it laughable that I currently have a hub which meets all of the "Need Some Goals?" checkmarks, has no warnings or heads up, currently has a Hubscore of 100, and it's unfeatured for "quality".
That's my problem with the so-called standards and rules around here. You can do everything you're told you're supposed to do, conform a hub to the rules as explained, and for some inexplicable reason still get dinged and told your hub isn't good enough. I've given up in some cases trying to play the system any longer and just move such hubs to my own websites as long as they fit and as I have the time. (Sites which, I have to say, have only seen better than ever traffic from Google instead of continually going down, down, down like HP.)
One thing (of a number of things) that I find perplexing is that, if the goal is to get back into Google's good graces, then why are some--or many--hubs that are being unfeatured for quality and then moved to other sites doing so well with Google? If they truly were naughty spam, I would think Google would dislike the content no matter where it lives.
Google tends to favor new articles and sites, but eventually goes after them the same way that they have come after HP. Most recently they destroyed Squidoo but there are many others.
True, I understand that ... but some of these hubs were doing well here too, before they were unfeatured, both in terms of Google traffic and, in some cases, sales.
That was then, this is now. Things have changed considerably and continue to change, so what seemed OK yesterday might not be OK today.
Yes, that's been said. My point is, these were not new and were doing well with Google up to the day there were unfeatured. Anyway ... nevermind. This isn't really a productive sub-discussion.
Yep, and I'd also add I'm talking about traffic trends on my own websites over 2-3 years time. Not simply a short few days/weeks/months. I've been slowly/steadily moving former lenses and hubs to these sites over the past year or more, with only better results than what they were ever seeing on a shared platform. So, please tell me how this is all the effect of Google liking "new content".
I'm not sure I can, but I do know that every time you move an article to another site, it is "new" once it arrives there. Also, most individual sites do not have the competition that shared sites have, so they are more likely to be ranked higher.
Traffic to all subdomains on HP is not going "down, down, down." One account transferred from Squidoo with 179 Hubs reached one million views seven weeks ago. And, it doesn't look like that account has a problem with '"quality." There is a correlation between 'quality' and 'traffic.' Also, maybe you are writing about things not many people are interested in reading about.
Good point about writing about things people are not interested in reading about. I get consistently low traffic on articles about subjects I know a lot about and have come to the conclusion that I'd better venture out into other subjects that will gain a larger readership. It's just a fact.
sockii, I took a look at the Hub you're talking about, and the issue is not with the quality of content, but rather with the product capsules. I can see why the language "defeatured for "quality" can be a little confusing, but I'll try explain it here. I hope this is also helpful to Gemini Fox, as her Hubs were not Featured for the same reason.
With the recent changes we've made related to spam and the QAP, "defeatured for quality" can mean one of two things:
1. The Hub did not score high enough ratings (the former meaning).
2. The Hub has spammy elements. This FAQ entry and this blog post go into more detail about that.
If you follow the guidelines about product capsules, then your Hubs have a much higher chance of becoming Featured.
Marina, my suggestion would be to update the Learning Center and Faq pages with the new info, and perhaps set a limit on the amount of recommended capsules per hub. This would make it much easier for hubbers who search the faq pages and learning center for guideline.
I would also recommend having a separate category for overpromotional instead of lumping it under quality. It is confusing to get a high hub score and get dinged for low quality at the same time.
Hey Cardisa! We've already updated the FAQ and LC, as well as the emails sent to Hubbers when Hubs become defeatured. We have some more QAP communication changes in the works so stay tuned!
A separate category is something we've considered but it may not be necessary after we roll out some of these other changes.
Thanks for the feedback!
It is still rather vague especially given that Hubpages definition of product links being "not excessive" seems to have changed? A little more detail or some up to date model hubs would help there.
I agree with this. More is coming soon, I promise! I do appreciate the feedback.
I'm looking forward to that. Sometimes it appears that the decisions about 'overly promotional' and how products are presented are highly subjective. I've seen so very many Hubs recently which are nothing but lists of products and yet they don't seem to have problems remaining featured. Other Hubs with a lot of original content/commentary, go unfeatured for being 'overly promotional.'
Please see this forum post, because I didn't think her Hubs were that objectionable:
I agree with WF - there are numerous hubs that are nothing but links to get sales. I reported one account (and reported quite a few hubs in it) that had many dozens of product hubs with tons of ad capsules. It's all still up and running, from what I can tell.
However, that account had had more than 100k views since it was imported into HubPages. So it makes money for the site.
But - if it is drawing down HP's overall status, and if it is spammy (which it appears to be) why isn't it addressed? It's harming other writers, so the dollars it generates for HP are at the expense of people who don't abuse the system.
We cannot have it both ways here.
I just took a look at one of your three articles and think I see your problem: the information you provide is not original. You can find it all over the internet, in encyclopedias and on videos. It is what they call "spun content"...and that type of work is unacceptable here on HP. What you have done is to gather pieces of information from other places and organize them along with a variety of images and products to create a post. It's pretty obvious, and if your other two that use this template are the same, I am surprised that the team accepted any of them.
Timetraveler2: LOL! If that is “spun content” (which it isn’t – look up the definition), HP needs to “unfeature” about 75% of the hubs on this website . . .
Life here on HP has become difficult since the latest Google Panda/Penguin iterations. Traffic and earnings are waaaaaay down for most people, resulting in a lot of rants like yours. I understand your frustrations. HOWEVER . . . I read your hub on AZ and immediately understood why HP is unhappy with your state hubs.
HP encourages its authors to write engaging media rich articles. Your state hubs which you say follow the same format as the one I read are just laundry lists of facts. They are not engaging. They don't hold the reader's attention, the bold text is jarring, the photos are poorly captioned, and the product ads interrupt the text rather than complement the flow of information.
Rather than flying off the handle and ranting in the forums, try reading other authors' hubs. See real examples of what it is that HP is looking for. Stop counting words and ads and look at successful hubs with the eyes of someone who has searched for information and been directed to some hubs. Then look at your own hubs through those same eyes and see the differences. Compare and contrast. Then do some rewriting and reformatting.
I have not posted or commented since the big move.
I don't understand why no one has offered a way for you to systematically find your problem with your article?
I had an understanding that these forums where suppose to be a place to get help, guess I'm wrong?
Anyway, This is something I learned awhile back:
1. Remove all the Amazon and Ebay from your post and see if it will publish and get featured.
2. If it does not get featured/published, then start checking it at these 2 places;
A. You can check to see if your words have been "Used" in the same fashion in other places. It does NOT mean you plagiarized anyone, however with writing on a subject that 1000 others have written on you can easily write the same words as others have.
Keep rewriting until you get 96% or better, I prefer 98% to 100%. It's also a good place to see if someone has stolen your article.
B. Check your KWD (Key Word Density) Keep your KWD at or below 3%, I prefer between 2% and 3%. http://kesor.net/keyword-density/
AND it won't hurt to check it anyway, whether it passes or not.
3. Now if the article itself passed mustard and everything else above is green; Take the most relevant Amazon or Ebay and add it back in. Be sure you add at least 50 Original words about the product.
4. If it still passes mustard, repeat step #3 with the next most relevant product, so-on and So-Forth until it don't pass or you have all 10 back in where you want them.
Doug, you have some good suggestions here, but apparently you did not take the time to read the responses on this forum. Several people offered sound advice to the original poster. Furthermore, people who come to the forums get plenty of help. Your judgment of the writers here is quite unfair. We do expect people to be responsible enough, however, to read the updates in the learning center instead of relying on others to constantly provide them with assistance. A good number of the people who offered help here have hundreds of thousands of views here, so they know what they are talking about. You disrespected them with your comment.
More specifically hubstaff have already said it was due to the new anti-spam rules--which are largely unwritten rules that we as individual users can only guess at.
There in lies the problem.
That is why a step-by-step solution is needed. Takes the guess work out of it.
If the problem winds up being something in the text, you can find it by removing 1 text module at a time. If it won't publish/feature with that one gone, put it back and try the next, until it will publish/feature.
Then you know which text to search thru to find the "Offensive" Text, first the paragraphs, then the sentences of said "Offensive" text.
A step by step solution works if it accurately relates to what the problem is likely to be. If not the user is just removing profitable aspects of the hub based on superstition.
Actually, Doug48, I appreciated your comment and did not find it disrespectful at all because you do give a step by step process that would help many people understand how to approach fixing their hub. While some hubbers here did provide good advice, I think it is telling that the answers of even those who have been here awhile show they don’t know what the actual rules are! The problem is that HP’s rules are so all over the place and so contradictory that any logical approach, as you laid out, will not always work.
What is interesting is Hubpages has been around for awhile and I honestly don't see it 'circling the drain'anytime soon. Logging in I have seen growth, maturity and very well written hubs, so I enjoy stopping by to see the updates and even making a comment or two.
AEvans: think there’s been more activity since the squids have been absorbed but trying to determine how many actually active hubbers there are here now is like trying to guess the number of marbles in a big, big jar. All I can say is that when I started, HOTDs used to get 50+ comments – the last several weeks, it seems they’ve been lucky to get five (With the exception of today’s well-loved billybuc! Go billybuc!)
Because it seemed to me that there were so few people here, a couple of weeks ago, I did a little experiment. I clicked on the “directory” at the bottom of this page. Do so, and three columns will appear – the directory of hubbers by alphabetical category. Click on one of those categories and another three columns appear. I went through every single hubber listed. I did this three times tabulating “active” hubbers, when they were last active and how many hubs those active hubbers had. Now THAT was a wake up call!!
ONLY 10? That sort of made me giggle. Ten Amazon capsules in one article, in addition to all the ads HubPages puts into the standard template? Nobody will hang around and wait for all that mess to load! Ten Amazon capsules is way too many, and makes even the longest articles look overly promotional.
In the Hubs given as examples of acceptable product usage, one has 12 products and another has 13: http://blog.hubpages.com/2015/01/07/an- … -capsules/
No wonder Google keeps slamming this site...
What Google likes and what HP QAP likes are somethings two different things. By the way, HP is now #95 for US traffic on Quantcast – down from #60 in mid-August.
That's when I closed my other account. I had no idea how much gravitas my account had. Now that I am back, I will do my best to return this place to its former glory. Forgive me, everyone, for causing this terrible downfall.
I'd always thought it was caused by the removal of my Armadillo Hub. You have lifted a weight off my shoulders.
Thank you, Writer Fox!
And when she gets done giggling about that she can take a gander at some of Paul Edmondson's own hubs.
maybe you can reduce your ebay and amazon capsules. I do noticed that if i have more than 5 in a hub, regardless of words, my hub gets unfeatured too. Then I reduce it to 2 amazon and one ebay, it got featured the next day until now.
peachpurple: I am pretty sure you're right, that this is the problem. But the last time I ran into problems with too many Amazon capsules I had 34. So, with only 10 and being far, far less than HPs very own instructions and since Paul Edmondson, himself, has one with 10 Amazon capsules, I thought I couldn't go wrong . . .
And there's still the fact that the OK one is featured . . .
But thanks for trying to help.
10 on one hub is still considered extreme no matter how many words the hub has.
No, not even per HP:
http://comfortsofhome.hubpages.com/hub/ … by-nursery
This hub is specifically about products, and will draw searchers that want to look at products (the keywords in the title reflect that) so that's why it's ok to have a good selection displayed in this instance.
It's all about appropriateness and matching keywords with user intent and page content. They all have to be in sync.
Gemini Fox, the reason one Hub is Featured and the other two are not is because all three are right on the edge. The QAP, as a system, is not perfect. This is why we tell people to shoot for 8s on the rating scale -- if you meet the criteria of an 8 you can be very confident that your Hub will be Featured. You can read a little more about that here.
Why would HP feature any of these hubs since all seem to be combinations of information that can be found all over the web and, as such, represent the equivalent of spun content? I can go to Wikipedia and find all of this info, for example, so why would anybody write articles like this and expect them to pass the QAP. It would be different if someone who has actually traveled to these places wrote an article, but that does not appear to be the case here.
Would you like to fix your hub so it conforms to the site's standards, or would you like a waiver so that all of your hubs will be published and featured without having to fit the standards?
I noticed that you have a list of credits for your images at the bottom of each hub. All of the links go to the name of the license instead of where you actually got the images. This means all of your links go to the same site. This means there is more than two going to creative commons in each hub.
I'm sorry, MT, but you're apparently missing the entire point. The point being that as far as I know I AM conforming to HPs standards. You are also missing the point that my OK hub (exact same layout) is featured. Sooooo . . .
Regarding the list of credits - per HP's A Guide to Proper Image Use on HubPages:
• Cite the specific CC license the work is under, and link to the specific CC license, ie. for CC Attribution you would link to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0.
The reason I put the credits in a text box is that I can make them no follow which to my understanding means that, no, they are not all linking to the same sites.
Eagerly awaiting your response . . .
It appears that the rules have changed about how to attribute images. The examples at the bottom of the page and throughout the Learning Center article do not link to the CC licenses. I went to the original source of these rules here:
and looking at their examples, they are citing the image and also the license. That makes more sense to me than just linking to the license. Hubpages says "it is nice to link the name" so they do not require linking to the image or the home page of person who owns the image.
Looks to me that you are doing that correctly. I apologize for the confusion. I learned something new.
No worries, MT, I agree with you that linking to the license seems kind of silly but was just trying to "follow the rules." Have to go review all that again.
It would be nice if they separated the overpromotional unfeaturing from the quality featuring, so it is more clear what needs to be done to fix the hub. I suppose you can guess - if it has a high score, it is deemed to be overpromotional - but it would be nice if those two were separated. But then again, the option needs to be there to present both - the hub is low quality and overpromotional.
I am talking here about the unfeaturing process and communication from HP and not commenting on any of your hubs.
Making them no follow tells Google not to follow them - it doesn't stop the links being links.
After months of being online and doing great, they unpublished one of my most productive hubs. Too promotional. I was highlighting links to volleyball drills online from various sites and putting them all in one place with descriptions of the drills to make it easy to see if you wanted to go there.
After editing it unsuccessfully a few times, I deleted it and moved it to a different site because I got tired of the lack of transparency with which Hubs can be publishable.
One day, it seems it's one thing. The next day, it's something different, depending on the mood of those evaluating it.
Valeant: I feel your pain. If this site doesn't get some of this straightened out, it's going to go down the tubes. I would love to earn the money that used to be earned here but don't mind earning and working towards the much less we earn here now. But it's not worth it if I have to jump through these ridiculous, nonsensical hoops.
Nice layout but I would try not having 2 adjacent ads without text in between. Also make sure each ad directly relates to its surrounding text.
Thank you, Sue Adams, but . . .
Take a look at the hub that HP, themselves, hold up as an example of what is good Amazon capsule usage:
http://comfortsofhome.hubpages.com/hub/ … by-nursery
People that feel that the rules are nonsensical and want to publish without following them should be aware that it is very easy to start your own site and publish following any rules that you like.
However you might also want to consider the fact that the rules are there to ensure that what you publish will meet the requirements and expectations of Google. It is Google that will be sending you the bulk of your traffic and if you don't meet their every changing expectations then they will not send you traffic.
Every change that this site makes is in response to Google; they are ensuring that we maximize our visits from the search engines. Of course you can just ignore what they want as you feel that they have unrealistic expectations but then Google can also ignore you....
LeanMan: sigh . . . entirely missing the point . . .
Gemini Fox, I read four of your articles today. I found them to be excellent.
What I found extremely interesting, is that I checked out one of the related hubs that was at the bottom of your hub about hair loss, and it had multiple products displayed all in a long row. That hub is featured - I would have thought it should have been considered "over-promotional".
Sometimes, it is difficult to understand the HP rules, as they do not seem to be applied "across the board".
shades-of-truth: thank you so much, not only for the compliment but because you seem to be one of the few who get what I’m saying!
I think it is worth saying that you do have a choice other than to adapt to the new situation for online content in general and Hubpages in particular--and that is to spend your time doing something else.
It is sad when something we used to enjoy becomes frustrating, but it is also a fact of life that things change. And things online tend to change constantly and rapidly.
Your products are only tangentially related to the content of the hub, that is the problem. You would do well to eliminate them entirely because people searching for information rarely click on product links.
I would tend to agree with you here.
On state informational pages, the most likely product a searcher would click on is a detailed state guide book, because they are planning a road trip or just curious to learn more about their own state.
I understand your logic, but it usually doesn't happen like that. Someone planning a road trip would probably buy a GPS (if they didn't already have one) and use the Internet to look up more info; they wouldn't buy a book.
Links to buy books are probably one of the most ineffective product links you can put in an informational hub. If the reader is already online looking up info for free, why would they want to buy a book whose contents can likely be found somewhere else online for free as well? There are some exceptions.
I am certainly one of the exceptions. I would immediately buy a hard copy book to have all the information to hand in a neatly bound form accessible anywhere at any time regardless of web access, power supply, etc.
It is the age of GPS and internet for sure. But, there are a lot people who like a guidebook in hand. Everyone does not have GPS or internet so that might be a targeted market that could produce sales for some lucky writers.
My experience has been very different. I've made a huge number of sales specifically of guidebooks and other types of books from my hiking/backpacking, travel, and Search & Rescue hubs (formerly lenses) and other similar articles for years, and those sales continue. I've also made a lot from other types of sales on my informational pages.
So, just pointing out that personal experiences can vary widely, obviously, when it comes to sales of books and other items from our hubs.
Yes indeed. I've made a LOT of travel guide book sales through the years on my European travel pages (as an American author). They are what I largely rely on when I travel internationally as well. A GPS or cell phone is fine in some cases, but not everyone wants to lay out the extra couple hundred dollars for international roaming charges to use their wireless device overseas...or regularly visit an internet cafe...or they might be staying somewhere they can't access the internet for free in their hotel/rental apartment. And a GPS is rather useless if you are not renting a car and just trying to walk around city streets. There is most certainly a market for books via information pages, especially in my experience in relation to specialty/international travel.
Exactly my own experience in the past. Thus that is why I am Amazon and eBay free these days.
Did it make a considerable difference? For the better?
Okey dokey! So a state's guidebook would add a spammy element unless I was writing about how wonderful that guidebook is and why? (Including photos about the sights I saw and where, etc., because of that informative book)
In my case, because of the type of informational hubs I usually wrote, all my Amazon and eBay would have by definition been tangential. I was actually lucky to have not gotten sales. If I had, and the capsules were still there, I'd have been sandboxed by now for sure.
I just published a hub that is Amazon and eBay free and after just an hour, it was featured and got 83. It was not intentional. I just forgot to put Amazon or eBay.
calculus-geometry: my products “are only tangentially related to the content of the hub”?! You’re telling me that you cannot understand how a hub on travel in a particular state and an Amazon capsule for an atlas for that state are related?
Someone help me out here . . . I’ve apparently pressed the wrong combination of keys on the keyboard and been beamed to the twilight zone . . .
Your hub "Arizona: State Facts and Trivia" has a product link to scrapbooking paper. You are in the twilight zone if you think that is related to Arizona.
LOL! Someone traveling to that state may want to make a scrap book of their vacation there! Happens all the time! And did you miss the fact that the product actually has "Arizona" in the TITLE?! Wake up!
The point you should be making (and was a response I just made to Susana S) is that maybe I need to do something about putting travel into the title of the hub. These hubs are under the "Travel and Explore" category so I just thought that would attract readers who were interested in the state for that reason.
Denial is not just a river in Egypt apparently...
Still not getting, I see . . . or maybe you're just "reading challenged" . . .
Refer to six (6) other responses who agree with me. Sorry, looks like you're outnumbered.
I would definitely consider buying the atlas.
Although by some replies, others do seem to get it . . .
I've had a few similar issues, but a few general tweaks (not really changing much)seemed to sort it out, no idea why!
I didn't see that as disrespectful. If you unpublish a hub, we get an e-mail saying why, but not what to do to save time to ensure if gets published. All he was saying is that it would be nice to say, please remove a few amazon products please.
Unfortunately, with the number of hubs that are published here, it is not possible for someone to review each hub and tell you specifically what you did wrong in each one.
While it is possible that removing just one Amazon capsule will get the hub featured, you should look at all the guidelines to get the hub to be the best it can be.
And if there is more than one thing wrong, it would take too much time to write up what to fix. Some people might remove the capsule and add a link or do something else equally over-promotional if they are given a specific list. By learning the rules, the Hubber can avoid issues with this hub, and with future hubs too.
You missed my point here. Making the statement that he "thought HP forums were a place where you could get help" and then indicating this does not happen is insulting to those on this post and others that take their time to offer suggestions to people with questions. The truth is that each individual is responsible for knowing the rules and keeping up with updates so that they can avoid problems. When other writers are kind enough to offer assistance, it is disrespectful to them to say that they do not do this. The truth is that it is nobody's job to offer help of any kind other than the team, to whom people can write about their concerns. When people give you something, the correct response is to say "thanks", not smack them in the face by telling them that what they gave was worthless.
I'm still pretty new here, but I thought that the rule about Amazon ads was that you had to have 50 words related to the ad for it to be acceptable, not an ad for every 50 words you write. Am I wrong?
You are not wrong at all Judy. This is exactly how the rule should be understood. Unfortunately many new hubbers misunderstand the rule and think it's OK to stuff hubs with ads.
To avoid confusion and frustration in future, the rule of a minimum of 50 words text description per ad needs a proviso: "that does not mean a hub may contain just ads" or something to that effect. Or, officially limit the number of ads allowed per hub.
by Gemini Fox 8 years ago
Had never done a “sales” hub before so decided to try. Have tweaked and tweaked this hub but it still keeps on being not featured due to quality. Getting a little T’d . . . http://geminifox.hubpages.com/hub/Green … t-Friendly- Have every single one of the “goal” (attributes) boxes ticked off...
by AnnaMKB 7 years ago
First off, my hubs are transferred from Squidoo, and I am aware of various issues there. I'd already checked and edited hubs after the transition, so this is all post transfer.What I don't understand is why some of my hubs get unfeatured after I've edited them? One even got...
by Jen withFlash 7 years ago
And why can't I add any Amazon capsules? If they're not allowed, then why are they even an option? The word count doesn't seem to matter because I can have over 2,000 words but have to remove them all before the hubs will become featured again. Either way, I like the color and...
by Mary McShane 7 years ago
I just got this email. Is terminating your account normal if you don't have any sales or referrals in 90 days????Hello,Thanks again for joining the Amazon Associates program. We’re reaching out to you because we have not seen sales activity on your account.At the time your application was...
by AnnaMKB 7 years ago
I just got this in my email;---A link to your Hub: http://hubpages.com/living/your-balcony-gardenDear AnnaMKB,We wanted to let you know that Your Balcony Garden was reviewed by a moderator and defeatured for not meeting HubPages' quality standards. Don't worry, you can edit your Hub to give it a...
by rebekahELLE 13 years ago
I have just checked my latest hub about love quotes ... and I had 2 amazon capsules with products. now they are not showing, saying there are no amazon results.I don't have time to fill them back up now, has anyone had this happen before?
Copyright © 2023 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
Copyright © 2023 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective owners.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|