Is it common knowledge that Africa is a country? Just read an article on Pairedlife by someone who just ranted on the HP forums about a certain big company. It's sad to see some good work by reputed hubbers get snipped and edited when global facts are changed and accepted. What do I do about this? Do I report it?
The editor probably didn't know Africa wasn't a country. I would often have conversations like this in the States::
Them: Where are you from?
Me: South Africa?
Them: Which country in South Africa?
Me: South Africa is a country.
Them: Oh, I met John from Kenya. Do you know him?
Me: No, Kenya is another country. It's about 3000 miles from South Africa.
Here's another conversation I had with someone..
Them: Where are you from?
Me: South Africa.
Them. Oh, which State is that?
Me:It's not a State. It's another country.
Them: What is a country?
To many people Africa is a country. I don't think they know the difference between a continent and a country.
Australia and Antarctic are both countries and continent.
Africa is a continent with 50 Countries
Australia is not a continent and country in most definitions. NZ, etc also fall under the same continent and it's often called Australasia.
Antarctica is not a country. It has no government, no cities, no capital, no permanent residents except penguins. An international group of twelve countries agreed to a treaty designed to protect the continent of Antarctica and limit use of it for scientific purposes.
Your right, was not sure if it was.
It was a hearsay, thanks for clarifying.
"You're right." Not your right.
"You're means 'you are.'
Your means something that belongs to you, e.g. your phone.
Just not correct that Antarctica is a country.
It's amazing Australia is a country, a continent and an island all in one.
How all those Australian animals went to the middle East got on an Arc, than returned home, is beyond my imagination.l
I think serious factual errors like that need to be reported. If I were a random reader and came across that sentence, I would be sure to never trust anything else I read on that site.
(It may have just been an error, as the author showed a map of the countries in West Africa in the same article. However, it should have been fixed before being moved over to a niche site-either fixed or never moved in the first place.)
Yeah, I was referring to the factual error and that editors should be paying attention to this stuff when moving articles over. I'll report it for that error, hopefully, they work on it. I wasn't sure if reports were only for spam or also factual errors. Thanks.
I think it should be reported under "low quality" The little box that pops up allows you to leave addittional information and it would be a good idea to copy and paste that info on Africa.
On another persons article I would just leave a comment about that, but this guy is so angry that he would probably just tell you to go away, or whatever. Based on his responses on the other thread, he may be banned anyway, and this serious factual error will go with him.
Yeah, I reported it under "other". I usually comment and tell the others about it or send an email if I find errors. The reason I brought this up here is for the editors. It's important that they look into this stuff to maintain the quality of the niche sites.
I did too. As I mentioned on another thread, I think too many articles are going to the niche sites that should not be moved. This is a good example.
Definitely report. I saw one a couple of days ago that had reached Featured status but it was full of grammar errors. I reported it and it's gone. The question is how did it pass QAP in the first place?
Maybe they got through in the earlier incarnation of the niche sites? They rushed a lot of stuff over in a big hurry.
I think that's possible. When the niches debuted, at least one third of my articles were moved in the first period. When I looked at some of them later, I was shocked to see many mistakes in them. As you recall, we've all spent loads of times bringing articles up to ever changing standards, and I think it's a good thing. But on some old articles, I still find things to fix.
Something just came to mind, I did put it off as an early move. But early moves were based on traffic and hubs that were getting 100 views a day were not directly moved, but this particular author does not have the 1k accolade yet, so this is definitely not the case.
But, as others have commented those hubs that were first moved could have used some editing, I edited a few of mine and hubpro premium did the rest.
I am inclined to agree with Tess because people can have incorrect definitions or incomplete definitions by stupidity or culturally. That can create upsets as well. We see it all too often in the forums here. HPers have their own definitions regarding subjects and the definitions do not agree with each other.
With that, I am concerned about quality in general. I am concerned about my own quality. I have feature articles and reread them only to find a typo or grammatical error I didn't notice before and quickly fix it. Then, I wonder why the HP staff didn't catch the error during the approval process to feature article or a niche site. Are they reading/editing our articles? Or, is it an automatic approval process based on an algorithm?
Furthermore, I have an article submitted for a niche site, which the editors want to edit before moving it over to the niche site. The email said that the list of articles needing editing for niche sites is quite long and it will be some time before they can get to my article. If I would like to try editing it, based on the guidelines, I could do that but I can't resubmit. I still have to wait - first come first serve.
I curious because we have more editors, now. If HP editing quality is still low and slow in responding and we have more editors, something is not right.
There are seven continents. Can you name them?
PS Brandon, I am editing my article. But, I can't resubmit. I still have to wait.
Haha Asia, Africa, North America, South America, Antarctica, Europe and Australasia or Oceania. If I'm right, this is in decreasing order of land mass (area).
Yup, you can't submit again as it's probably in some kind of queue. When they get to it, I'm pretty sure they see the latest version. If you could re-submit, it would probably go to the back of the queue. So this may be a good thing.
That's the landmass consisting of Europe and Asia. It's not classified as a continent by most conventions, but two continents: Europe and Asia.
So is Australia lumped in with Asia as in Australasia? Did't know that. Thanks.
Nope, Australasia from what I studied is: Australia, Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands, Fiji, New Zealand and anything else that I'm missing in that region.
On the classification of Australia as an Island continent on its own, NZ tends to get left out, some would consider Papua New Guinea as a part of Asia in this case, I believe. I would guess this is the reason it was termed Australasia, not to confuse it with being just Australia, while considering some of the so-called Asian countries. Probably makes NZ feel better that it's not Australia lol.
Just googled it. Eurasia is the continent of Europe and Russia, India, etc.
The division between Europe and Asia as two different continents is a historical social construct, with no clear physical separation between them; thus, in some parts of the world, Eurasia is recognized as the largest of the six, five, or even four continents on Earth. In geology, Eurasia is often considered as a single rigid megablock. However, the rigidity of Eurasia is debated based on paleomagnetic data.
I'm very confused now. It says Eurasia is the largest continental landmass, but I've read repeatedly that Africa is.
Got to do some more explorng...
Yup, this is right. It's in line with what I said, Eurasia is the combined land mass of Europe and Asia. But Papua New Guinea is not highlighted in green because it belongs to the continent of Australasia.
Asia is the biggest of the 7 continents. When you have 7 continents, that means Europe and Asia are two continents. When you combine them into Eurasia (the geological land mass) it results in a larger area making it the largest with Africa being second (land above water).
There are quite a few definitions for what constitutes a continent, if I had to pick I would pick Geology and in that case, there are recent discoveries of a new tectonic plate that separates NZ from Australia or something on these lines. There's a new tectonic plate discovered in that part of the world.
Um. No. When you mentioned the 7 continents originally, you just said Europe. I said Eurasia. If you read the wiki entry, the days when Europe and Asia/Russia were regarded as two continents are long gone. It was a human construct. A continent is a landmass that is surrounded by the sea.
You're correct about the tectonic plates, but I think generally when we are talking about continents today, we are talking about land masses surrounded by the sea.
"A continent is a landmass that is surrounded by the sea. "
How many continents are there in the western hemisphere?
By this definition Africa isn't a continent either. And all islands become continents. This definition is flawed.
Cool! The editors will probably see new date stamp or something like that.
Which continent is surrounded by water on every conceivable side?
imo you were right to report. If Hubpages got in trouble previously for inaccuracies something like this could cause more problems
Huh - I always thought it was: Asia, Africa, North America, South America, Antarctica, Europe, Australia - decreasing order of size.
But then I've also heard talk of Zealandia (sp?)
I'm glad the crackpot "science" hubs about perpetual motion machines and free energy generators didn't make it to Owlcation
Do those exist here on HP I'd love to see some. A hub on why PPMs are not really possible or how they would be possible only in ideal situations would be a good hub to move to Owlcation though. Maybe an idea for you to write one provided there's search volume.
Jean, I am glad to hear it happens with others, too. Fixing things is part of keeping the articles fresh.
by Cholee Clay 20 months ago
I have an article that an editor has made substantial changes too. Including adding a bio that they wrote themselves. I have not seen an edit this bad in quite some time on one of my articles, and I do not want to go through the whole article and rewrite half of it. I've already spent countless...
by Dina Sostarec 5 weeks ago
Hi,Do more experienced Hubbers have any useful tips for getting your article moved to a niche site? I kept seeing advice that goes something like "make sure you write a high-quality article" but it just seems so vague to me. I have 9 articles now and the only one that was moved to a niche...
by Glenn Stok 2 years ago
I noticed that hubs in niche sites no longer include the "More by this author" section below the hub. Is this just an oversight or was it a decision to drop it on niche sites?
by Scott S Bateman 12 months ago
I have been pleased with the audience and revenue for my articles on HubPages since joining the site some years ago.I commend the company for creating the successful niche sites at a time when similar sites were folding. My existing articles that moved to those sites have done even better than...
by Farrah Young 6 months ago
I read on here that articles that aren't moved to the niche sites don't get as much live as those on the niche sites.Would it be wise to continue writing here knowing there's the possibility of that happening, although I try to make my articles optimized in the hopes it will pull in some traffic...
by Jean Bakula 6 months ago
It took two years, but I finally did it. But normally since so much editing and work is needed to get the articles up to standard, they are still added to the top spot of the Profile page so readers know you have moved a rewritten piece to a niche site.This one wasn't, and I was told that was...
Copyright © 2019 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 Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|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.|