I have an article on Artist Communities in National Parks. It is the same quality as other hubs on similar topics but wasn't featured. I edited, nothing, then added a list of the 50 some odd programs and it was featured. For about 3 hours. Then despite not being changed again and getting comments and reads it was unfeatured. I thought maybe the three amazon capsuls could have been flagged as spammy even though the article has almost 1700 words and the books are suggested readings which i have written information for. I left one and out two into text and was featured again. This time for 5 hours before being unfeatured. Has anyone else had experienced like this? I have a message into editing but haven't heard back yet. I suppose I can get rid of all the amazon links but this seems like nothing but desperation.
I'm sorry that this has happened to you, Natalie. I enjoyed reading your article very much. I'm certainly not an expert in using Amazon capsules, but the impression I've got from reading the forum is that a hub must either be about the item in an Amazon capsule or the item must be essential for a project described in the hub. In addition, the writer must convince readers that he or she has used the item in the capsule.
Perhaps someone who is more knowledgeable about Amazon than me will add more information. Another possibility is that you could experiment by deleting the Amazon capsule and links and then watching to see if the article is featured again.
Got a problem? Move it to your own website. Works every time.
Personal experience is always a plus. Perhaps, your intro can be more about how you view the idea of writing residency and offer your personal opinion about the locations. Though, some insight into Amazon capsule is a good idea. The books are presented as a sidebar and not part of the overall article. I hope this helps.
Your Amazon products are the problem. I think you must have missed the most recent update to the rules concerning Amazon. There are two aspects now:
1. The product must be directly relevant to the MAIN subject of your Hub.
Your Hub is about the Artists in Residence programs, not about the parks themselves, so the books may not qualify as "directly relevant". If you feel they are relevant, then you need to make it clear what readers will gain from the book. Are you suggesting that if someone wants to apply for the residency in that park, they should read that particular book as preparation? If so, say so.
2. You must offer a personal recommendation for the product.
Reading your comments on each book, they are impersonal. For a book,you need to have read the book - or at least, you need to make it sound as though you've read it That means using "I", "my" or "mine" and expressing opinions about why the book is good, not just giving a factual summary of the book.
What am I going to do about you? When I find the perfect link, you will love it.
Thanks Marissa - as usual you are a great resource for figuring things out. Since the park residencies usually require residents to have a stated focus on one or more of the parks themes, I did have in mind that the books could be a good resource for applying and once there. I will work on things some more. I appreciate the help.
You're welcome. In that case I'd say something about the book being a recommended resource to study before applying.
Okay this is becoming truly aggravating. I have edited the article six times for content, grammar, punctuation, word choices, links, amazon products, amazon product reviews and suggested readings. I have added content in the intro stating that the suggested readings are being suggested because they can help applicants to the AIR programs be more successful in being accepted to the programs by providing information related to park themes. As proposals must have interpretive elements regarding park themes this is directly related to both the title of the article and the content. Additionally, I have added content for each review that discusses how the book can specifically help applicants based on that parks theme. I have removed the amazon capsules and put the books in text immediately after the reviews instead. I have now written the editors twice with no response other than 6 copies of the same automated email.
The most frustrating thing, which I am having trouble understanding is that each time I edit the article, it is featured for anywhere from 4 -12 hours, then once more unfeatured with another email sent with only general information. As articles are not all automatically featured before being reviewed editorial staff, it doesn't make sense that the article is initially thought to be okay then only hours later with no changes it is decided that it is not okay. I have no problem making changes to an article to meet HP criteria and to ensure my articles follow site rules. But wasting time on six edits using a hit or miss method of trying to determine the problem without feedback is really not reasonable. Featuring and unfeaturing the same article numerous times over the course of days is an odd thing to do and adds to the frustration in that when you think the article finally meets HP criteria you then find out this is not the case despite making no changes to the article. I am sorry for my ranting - I almost never do this but I just feel as if I'm batting my head against the wall and wasting time on the same article blindly changing it when I could be writing new material. Thanks for tolerating my moodiness.
No moodiness at all, I understand it's frustrating.
The thing to remember is this. If a Hub is not Featured, the most likely reason is that you've broken a rule. Grammar, punctuation and word choices are the least likely reason. So there is no point doing ANY work on proof reading until you're sure you've fixed any rule issues.
Did you miss this part of my explanation about the Amazon capsules, or is there something about it you don't understand:
2. You must offer a personal recommendation for the product.
Reading your comments on each book, they are impersonal. For a book,you need to have read the book - or at least, you need to make it sound as though you've read it wink That means using "I", "my" or "mine" and expressing opinions about why the book is good, not just giving a factual summary of the book.
One more thing - if you are going to use an Amazon capsule rather than a link, then put your information about the book in the "description" section of the capsule.
Thanks again but I have taken all Amazon capsules, products and links out of the article completely. Evidently that wasn't the problem because, once more, the article was featured for about four hours and then unfeatured again. I have now edited it a seventh time and emailed the team a third time as the first two emails asking for clarification have still not been answered. It is extremely difficult to be expected to alter an article when you are provided with no feedback as to what it is that the editors are taking exception with. I can't say the quality is any different than my other articles. When a writer becomes this frustrated and has no ability to communicate directly with anyone on the editing team they lose their enthusiasm to continue writing for a site. Sorry once again for venting. It is just that I am more than happy to edit an article if the editors tell me what it is they want to have changed instead of receiving a dozen form emails saying "Your article could be featured," with no useful feedback to allow for one good edit to suffice. I don't feel this is unreasonable.
I think removing all of the Amazon capsules and links (as you have done) is a good way to eliminate that as the reason for the problem.
It looks like your article is currently featured. If it becomes unfeatured again, perhaps you can post the text of the email you are getting. Sometimes they offer a clue.
Thanks for the reply. It's actually not featured - it's under review again. It was featured for a few hours then unfeatured again after I removed all the Amazon capsules and links so that wasn't it. I subsequently edited it again, deleted some of the material and added other material since I wasn't sure what else to edit.
by Catherine Giordano 13 months ago
I understand the rationale for removing amazon capsules. I'm very careful not to include amazon capsules unless they are 100% relevant, and I can provide a personal opinion. I rarely do more than one per hub.HP is not only snipping amazon capsules on hubs for niche sites, but also just to have a...
by Bill Yovino 5 years ago
Hi All,I received an email from Hubpages -"We are writing to notify you that your Hub contains Unrelated Links or Products. Your Hub remains published, giving you the chance to address this violation."There are no flags or warnings on my account page and nothing indicated in the Broken...
by Waheed Hassan 10 months ago
So, this is the third time HP has snipped Amazon from my hubs. Every time one of my Hubs is edited by HubPages to add to a network site they snip any Amazon capsules on the Hub. The Amazon capsule is always extremely relevant to the topic discussed and is not spammy, yet HubPages doesn't seem to...
by Gemini Fox 3 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...
by Brandon Lobo 6 years ago
Hi MickiIf you've noticed I've not written any hubs recently, I'm on my vacations from University and thought of doing a 30 hubs in 30 days challenge. Rather, I've gone for a 30 Wizzley articles in 30 days - for a good reason: Their amazon Capsules are way better formatted - users feel like...
by Glenn Stok 4 years ago
The nice thing about the new Amazon capsule is that it displays the description text in the same size as the rest of the hub. This can be beneficial and may turn into better sales. So I reorganized one of my hubs, moving much of my text from text capsules into the Amazon description fields. This...
Copyright © 2018 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.
|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.|