jump to last post 1-6 of 6 discussions (15 posts)

Unfeatured Article

  1. Natalie Frank profile image97
    Natalie Frankposted 4 weeks ago

    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.

  2. AliciaC profile image100
    AliciaCposted 4 weeks ago

    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.

    1. Natalie Frank profile image97
      Natalie Frankposted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

      Okay - I am still not great with the amazon stuff and just prefer usually not to include them though they may be helpful in terms of the items themselves or income (:  Thanks for the reply - I'll work on it some more.

  3. paradigmsearch profile image93
    paradigmsearchposted 4 weeks ago

    Got a problem? Move it to your own website. Works every time.

  4. Kenna McHugh profile image86
    Kenna McHughposted 4 weeks ago

    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.

  5. Marisa Wright profile image98
    Marisa Wrightposted 4 weeks ago

    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 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.

    1. paradigmsearch profile image93
      paradigmsearchposted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

      What am I going to do about you? When I find the perfect link, you will love it. big_smile

    2. Natalie Frank profile image97
      Natalie Frankposted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

      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.

      1. Marisa Wright profile image98
        Marisa Wrightposted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

        You're welcome.  In that case I'd say something about the book being a recommended resource to study before applying.

        1. Natalie Frank profile image97
          Natalie Frankposted 4 weeks agoin reply to this

          Will do.  Thanks again.

          1. Natalie Frank profile image97
            Natalie Frankposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

            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.

            1. Marisa Wright profile image98
              Marisa Wrightposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

              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.

              1. Natalie Frank profile image97
                Natalie Frankposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

                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.

                1. Sherry Hewins profile image99
                  Sherry Hewinsposted 3 weeks agoin reply to this

                  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.

  6. Natalie Frank profile image97
    Natalie Frankposted 3 weeks ago

    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.

 
working