Network Sites Are Getting Stricter With Rules and Regulations

Jump to Last Post 1-10 of 10 discussions (43 posts)
  1. hclpd profile image95
    hclpdposted 20 months ago

    A lot of my new hubs have not been getting considered for Reelrundown lately. It feels as if they have gotten a tad more strict. Do you guys feel the same way?

    1. samanthacubbison profile image88
      samanthacubbisonposted 20 months agoin reply to this

      Hi @hclpd! Every editor's acceptance process is a little different, but we do update our standards occasionally to maintain high-quality content across the network.

      I would suggest following any notes that your editors may provide. Their job is to be helpful, so applying their suggestions should better your chances of being accepted.

      1. paradigmsearch profile image61
        paradigmsearchposted 20 months agoin reply to this

        HP's current practices are:

        A. Making people unwilling to gamble their time, money, and labor to write new articles.

        B. Making people afraid to update their existing articles.

        It is not the policy that is at fault. It is the way it is being implemented.

        1. samanthacubbison profile image88
          samanthacubbisonposted 20 months agoin reply to this

          I'm sorry you feel that way! To continue ranking well with Google and readers, we need to be strategic with our content. Online writers everywhere must be prepared to edit their work after submitting, and we do try to provide as much feedback as possible. Otherwise, our staff executes edits to assure that even more articles get published. These are normal practices in the world of online publishing.

          @hclpd, I have reviewed some of your content and stand behind my original suggestion. Your articles are unique and informative, so with a little tweaking here and there, I think you'll have no problem at all.

          1. paradigmsearch profile image61
            paradigmsearchposted 20 months agoin reply to this

            Again, it is not HP's policies that are at fault. I understand and agree with them. It is HP's method of implementation that is causing all the problems and is being a deal-breaker for many.

          2. hclpd profile image95
            hclpdposted 20 months agoin reply to this

            Thank you for reviewing them. I will and see what I can do with them. Maybe I'll delete, tweak, and then republish them. That way, it will be reconsidered without me having to wait for 15 days.

        2. greenmind profile image98
          greenmindposted 20 months agoin reply to this

          I think paradigmsearch has a point here. I'm feeling it.

          1. theraggededge profile image98
            theraggededgeposted 20 months agoin reply to this

            Sorry... I completely disagree with both assertions smile

            1. paradigmsearch profile image61
              paradigmsearchposted 20 months agoin reply to this

              I could send a long email to HP, but that would take a lot of time and work to write it. I can guarantee that HP would agree with what the email said and would very probably make use of the information in how they decide their procedures. smile

          2. OldRoses profile image95
            OldRosesposted 20 months agoin reply to this

            Wow, I couldn't disagree more.  I've never mentioned this in the forums before because I don't want to appear to be bragging, but all of my hubs are moved to the appropriate niche site within a few days of of being published.  I have only ever had one hub rejected by the editors.  I received the usual bland email so I queried them about it.  They were kind enough to send me a detailed response.  Additionally, I have been rewriting old hubs and submitting them to niche sites every two weeks.  None have been rejected.  Admittedly I have had a couple of over-zealous editors inappropriately "edit" a couple of my hubs.  I just reversed their changes.

            Overall, my experience writing on HubPages has been positive.  And I look forward to the 28th of the month.

            1. paradigmsearch profile image61
              paradigmsearchposted 20 months agoin reply to this

              That is good to hear, especially the part about the 28th; I am fond of that date, myself. big_smile

              I guess I should have said "a percentage of people", instead of just "people". smile

            2. theraggededge profile image98
              theraggededgeposted 20 months agoin reply to this

              Yep. This has been my experience too. And the editors are willing to discuss any fixable issues.

      2. Ladymermaid profile image89
        Ladymermaidposted 20 months agoin reply to this

        Yep, I've been noticing fewer being accepted as well. If I think the refusal is unmerited then I move the article to my own sites.

        1. hclpd profile image95
          hclpdposted 20 months agoin reply to this

          I thought I was the only one noticing the trend. If only I knew how to create a blog. Where and how do I start?

    2. FatFreddysCat profile image95
      FatFreddysCatposted 20 months ago

      Just curious: does each niche site have its own "experts" reviewing our articles? In other words, are the ReelRundown editors movie nerds, are the SpinDitty editors music geeks, etc.... or does every new submission simply go into a general "bucket" that the pool of editors pick through?

      My music articles are generally moved onto Spinditty within a few days of being posted, with minimal changes  - I'm not tryin' to toot my own horn, I'm just sayin'. However, when I write the occasional movie review (just to mix things up for my own amusement) my success rate for making it to ReelRundown is about 50/50. R.R. is also the only niche site I've ever gotten an "editors' note" email from with suggestions to improve the piece(s).

      My articles on ReelRundown don't get much traffic anyway, so at this point if I write a movie review and they accept it for R.R., great. If not, I don't worry too much about tweaking it to get it on there.

      1. samanthacubbison profile image88
        samanthacubbisonposted 20 months agoin reply to this

        @FatFreddysCat, we have a system that sends articles to the most appropriate Network Site. Then the editors pick through their curated "bucket."

        And there's some jumping around when necessary, but our Network Sites are usually claimed by editors who are total nerds, yes.

      2. EricFarmer8x profile image96
        EricFarmer8xposted 20 months agoin reply to this

        I have noticed something similar. Anything I write that fits on TubrboFuture gets there somewhat fast. But anything anything else seems to need to pass harder checks?

        I think I might try some more content for TurboFuture though since I seem to be able to write for it.

    3. PaulGoodman67 profile image96
      PaulGoodman67posted 20 months ago

      Yes, I used to have the vast majority of my new hubs getting accepted by niche sites. And when not accepted initially, I got told what changes were necessary. But recently I've had a number of rejections with the don't bother to resubmit for at least a couple of months message. This type of rejection gives no indication on the specific reasoning (just completely general list of possible rejection reasons) and is not helpful.

      It's frustrating if you've written a couple of thousand words and spent a few days on something. I'm still hanging in there, but it's demoralizing. I used to think that I knew what was required, but not so much nowadays.

      1. hclpd profile image95
        hclpdposted 20 months agoin reply to this

        That's exactly my problem as well. Something needs to be done about this issue.

        1. PaulGoodman67 profile image96
          PaulGoodman67posted 20 months agoin reply to this

          I got another one today (not this, but another HP account). Same generic rejection letter. No feedback.

          It seems like what worked before is no longer being accepted. Even though it's not dissimilar to work already up there.

          Unrelated, I also got a comment from member of public regarding factually incorrect information that an editor had inserted into a hub. Not the first case of this happening.

          Mistakes happen. And generally speaking, the editing in recent times has boosted my traffic enormously. But I'm not sure what to do at the moment. I may try writing one more hub on a different topic, and if that fails, take a break. If the acceptance rate is 10% instead of 90%, it becomes less appealing. smile

          1. Amanda Buck profile image98
            Amanda Buckposted 20 months agoin reply to this

            You have more than one HP account?  Is that possible and why?  I can see that it might be a benefit if you write about totally different topics and want to have a separate account or identity for specific topics.  Interesting.

            1. PaulGoodman67 profile image96
              PaulGoodman67posted 20 months agoin reply to this

              Well, I don't think it's particularly useful now. It's a result of two factors:

              1. During the "subdomains" period of HubPages, account views were rising and falling like a roller coaster ride. It seemed like a good idea to try different subject areas, and also not put my eggs in one basket, because major crashes were common.

              2. The death of Squidoo meant that my Squidoo stuff migrated over here and formed a couple of new accounts.

              I wouldn't particularly recommend having more than one account in the current setup.

    4. eugbug profile image97
      eugbugposted 20 months ago

      I agree that rejections should include more specific info on what led to the decision, rather than editors just clicking some boxes to categorise the rejection. That's of course if there was a very specific reason, rather than the article failing to reach a standard in some category. Strangely editors never edit any changes in math hubs. Their eyes probably glaze over when they see all those symbols smile

      1. samanthacubbison profile image88
        samanthacubbisonposted 20 months agoin reply to this

        @eugbug, thank you for your feedback! I'll pass this on to the team.

        I'm sure the editors are scared to touch those math hubs, haha.

    5. Rupert Taylor profile image96
      Rupert Taylorposted 20 months ago

      I can't say I've noticed stricter vetting. Most of what I submit gets moved to the niche sites within a few days with minimal editing. As with FatFreddiesCat, I'm not boasting, just saying.

      Having plied my trade as an editor for several decades I understand the complexities and subjective nature of the job. Writers, understandably, are a bit touchy about their work being altered, but you have to accept that somebody coming to your article for the first time may not see it as the brilliant and  carefully crafted prose you believe it to be.

      (Suck up alert) In general, I find the HP editors to be helpful and professional. I might quibble about the odd change but it's not my website and I operate on the theory that they know better than me what works on this webbynet thing.

      1. paradigmsearch profile image61
        paradigmsearchposted 20 months agoin reply to this

        My post is not about the editors, it's about how the editors are inefficiently used and some other issues that don't even involve the editors.

      2. samanthacubbison profile image88
        samanthacubbisonposted 20 months agoin reply to this

        @Rupert Taylor, thanks for the support. You'll be receiving your official "Suck Up" gift basket in the mail shortly. smile

        1. paradigmsearch profile image61
          paradigmsearchposted 20 months agoin reply to this

          Hmm. A promise of a monetarily worthy suck-up "basket" might entice me to do that email. smile

          1. samanthacubbison profile image88
            samanthacubbisonposted 20 months agoin reply to this

            I'd love to know what thoughts you have on the matter. I can't promise anything, but feedback from the community is always helpful.

            1. paradigmsearch profile image61
              paradigmsearchposted 20 months agoin reply to this

              The email would not be so much feedback, but more of as an analysis and recommendations based on that analysis.

    6. Will Apse profile image90
      Will Apseposted 20 months ago

      I have serious rejection issues. I like working on my own and I hate criticism which I tend to see as an attack on me rather than my work. This is undoubtedly my problem and not anyone else's, lol.

      I think genuinely actionable feedback would help (as others have suggested). Give the writer hope.

      I would suggest a rejection check list with a link from each item to advice on fixing the issue.

      Something like:

      Spelling and or grammar needs improvement
      Needs better structure (reader needs to be led through the issues more carefully)
      Topic already extensively covered
      Needs illustrations/pictures/graphics
      Needs more evidence to support assertions within the article
      Needs to include alternative viewpoints
      You think you are a writer but you are not

      Whatever...

      The ed ticks away. Link each rejection criteria to a page in the help section which shows the fix. Is this feasible in the time frame?

      1. Solaras profile image97
        Solarasposted 20 months agoin reply to this

        In the instance of an article submitted to Delishably, I got this from the editor, accepting the article, pending these changes. Shameful that I had these issues, and more were presented to me upon the editing that occurred after its move.  Perhaps not all of the editors are bothering to follow these practices.

        "The Editor who reviewed your article suggests that you address the following issues:

        Additional Note From Your Editor:
        Thank you for submitting this article to Delishably!

        In order to consider it, please make the following edits:

        - Please fix the typo in the text overlay in the top image ("Waldorph" should be "Waldorf").

        - The title makes it sound like the article will include only a recipe for the salad dressing, not for the entire salad. More apt might be: "The Waldorf: A Simple and Sophisticated Fruit Salad Recipe."

        - Please lowercase all ingredients.

        Thank you!"

        1. Will Apse profile image90
          Will Apseposted 20 months agoin reply to this

          That is indeed very helpful and detailed. If they go into that level of detail for everyone, my earlier comment is entirely redundant.

          1. PaulGoodman67 profile image96
            PaulGoodman67posted 20 months agoin reply to this

            The issue for me is not so much the "rejection" as that the criteria or something else seems to have changed. Maybe its just a change of  emphasis placed on certain factors. I mean, some of the stuff I've had rejected in recent times are not majorly different to the stuff I had accepted without question in the past. Historically, once I got into the swing of writing for the niches, I had almost nothing rejected for a long, long time. And if it was rejected, it came with easily actionable advice. My acceptance rate was around 95% if not more.

            I suspect that there's a reaction to some of the recent Google Algo changes going on, but I wish it was made a little clearer how us writers are supposed to adapt. Guesswork is painful when it takes hours to write an article. The Maven tutor videos are fine, but pretty basic. (Though I do need to go through all my author biogs still).

      2. EricFarmer8x profile image96
        EricFarmer8xposted 20 months agoin reply to this

        I feel the same way sometimes. This is something I have needed to work on and I try to improve with suggestions.

    7. Don Bobbitt profile image94
      Don Bobbittposted 20 months ago

      I Wonder .... Is a suggestion for improvements a rejection?
      Or is it just a suggestion for improvements?

      I get these regularly, and honestly, when I get on it's usually because I got lazy with my article, often with my overall structure and my presentation.

      Let's be honest here. We're here to be the best at what we do and how we present it.
      I know I certainly suck at this sometimes, and having an editor throw a cold glass of water in my face occasionally doesn't leave scars!

      1. samanthacubbison profile image88
        samanthacubbisonposted 20 months agoin reply to this

        @Don Bobbitt When we send out author edit requests, they are always suggestions for improvement! We want to accept as many articles as possible, so we try to help in any way we can. These requests are normally quick and easy fixes.

        When we send a "rejection," the article often needs a bit more time spent.  Even so, they are always meant to encourage the author to go through and improve their work before resubmitting.

        I'm sorry about the whole "cold glass of water" thing, but at least it's filtered!

    8. Rupert Taylor profile image96
      Rupert Taylorposted 20 months ago

      Samantha. I don't want to be ungracious, but could the "suck-up gift basket" include Barolo wine, Brie, and Creme Caramel? Okay, just the Barolo would be fine.

      1. samanthacubbison profile image88
        samanthacubbisonposted 20 months agoin reply to this

        I was thinking of just a pound of lemons, but Barolo sounds better.

    9. paradigmsearch profile image61
      paradigmsearchposted 20 months ago

      So far, none of the feedback here has covered what my analysis-recommendation email would cover.

      I shall give HP a gentle nudge. Google Analytics has informed me that in November:

      A. My website exceeded my HP articles in users, sessions, page views.
      B. My website literally has half the bounce rate of my HP articles.

      In other words, I'm getting darned good at what I do. All we need to do is discuss that suck-up gift basket. If interested, contact me offline. smile

    10. paradigmsearch profile image61
      paradigmsearchposted 20 months ago

      Because of this thread and the things I posted here, someone (a stranger) sent me an inquiry. Paranoid person that I am, I'm leery of revealing my email address to strangers. So am posting the answer here, since I'm sure they'll see it. smile

      https://www.blogger.com

      1. Sherry Hewins profile image95
        Sherry Hewinsposted 20 months agoin reply to this

        When I click that link it takes me to my blog

        1. paradigmsearch profile image61
          paradigmsearchposted 20 months agoin reply to this

          That's because you are already signed in. For an unsigned in newbie, it takes them to the Google intro telling them all about Blogger/Blogspot. smile

     
    working

    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

    Show Details
    Necessary
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis 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.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Features
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Marketing
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe 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 PixelsWe 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.
    Statistics
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
    ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)