HOTD, Hubpro, Hub Quality - HP needs Spelling, Grammar, Copy Checker

1. 52

   janderson99posted 10 years ago

   The recent forums on
   
   => HOTD quality see http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/129959; http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/129961
   
   => Hubpro quality - All three examples in the Hubpro blog post had spelling errors + one had 103 words of copied text - see http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/129724
   
   => Overall Hub Quality - many posts regarding poor spelling and grammar in many hubs despite QAP
   
   highlight the need for a Hub Quality Checker built into the HP system. There are many great software tools such as Grammarly, SpellCheckPlus etc. that do checks for inputed text and produce error reports. Surely HP could approach one of these companies and licence the API so that such a tool could be built into the HP system. This tool would run after a hub is submitted to be published. (Done Editing). There is plenty of time. Tests could be introduced to block publishing until major errors were fixed.  It would be available for staff and hubbers to use. It would produce a report listing possible errors (see example below).
   
   Surely it is time for HP to add a tool which would lift the quality of ALL hubs on the site by reducing spelling, grammar and plagiarism. The recent examples show that STAFF needs these tools. Errors and copied content in Hubpro is clearly counterproductive. Most authors would welcome these tools and would make the changes willingly. They would learn a lot as well. Even staff excuse themselves by saying they miss things.
   
   [I certainly do make mistakes! I sometimes miss typos, despite reading a Hub carefully. Keep in mind that it's also surprisingly hard to find a Hub that includes zero typos, no matter how many times the author, or even a professional Editor has carefully looked it over]  => why not get a tool that does this quickly and easily for staff and hubbers.
   
   Sorry but this is simply not good enough to defeat the Panda slap.
   
   Example of tool report (SpellCheckPlus) contents:
   possible spelling error
   Daylilies ---> Day lilies, Day-lilies, Dailies
   Sweetbriar ---> Sweetbrier, Sweetbriers, Sweetbread, Sweetbrier's
   punctuation
   medicinal capacity, because ---> One does not usually use a comma here.
   plant pot, because ---->  One does not usually use a comma here.
   rosebushes locally, since ----> One does not usually use a comma here.
   spelling error
   colur --> color
   word choice
   dependant on --->  Write dependent in this context.

   replyreport
   1. 86

      jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      +1 It's time.

      replyreport
   2. 74

      TIMETRAVELER2posted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I totally agree.  I am a professionally trained language instructor with years of experience who carefully edits every hub, but no matter what spell checker, etc. I use, every time I go back to read or edit, I still find typos, missed words, spelling problems, etc.
      
      Those programs are not perfect, but they certainly would help, so I am totally in favor of this.

      replyreport
   3. 88

      Phyllis Doyleposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I would certainly appreciate this tool. It would help us all a great deal.

      replyreport
2. 71

   littlethingposted 10 years ago

   I could definitely get behind something like this. I take my time with my hubs and do my best to get all they typos and the like out, but there are times I miss things and don't find then until months later. I'd like to have something that can produce an error report for me.

   replyreport
   1. 52

      janderson99posted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I run a checker tool SpellCheckPlus on every hub I write and edit. It takes about a minute and you get a list of things to check. Easy and simple to do. I then know I have clean copy. Getting a report is easier than wading through highlights in the text block.

      replyreport
3. 91

   rebekahELLEposted 10 years ago

   +

   replyreport
   1. 88

      sallybeaposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I suggested this two years ago when I first joined here but nothing happened and since then I have just copied my content into Word.  It would be a lot easier not to have to do this but then some would argue that it gives one an opportunity to save a copy elsewhere.  I definitely support this suggestion.

      replyreport
4. 69

   Dressage Husbandposted 10 years ago

   Squidoo tried this and look what happened to them!

   replyreport
   1. 80

      LuisEGonzalezposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Squidoo had other issues. I think that a grammar checker can't hurt.

      replyreport
5. 0

   calculus-geometryposted 10 years ago

   Why doesn't a site that endlessly touts its professional editors use those same editors to proofread the hub in the top slot each day? Not invasive HubPro-style editing, just a quick once-over to fix obvious spelling mistakes, such as in titles and subtitles.

   replyreport