Changing what an editor did on an article

1. 84

   NateB11posted 4 years ago

   How do you deal with a change that was made to an article by an HP editor? They unnecessarily changed the title of the article, I'd like to change it back to what it was. Is that what everyone else does when this kind of thing happens? Curious.

   replyreport
   1. 89

      Sherry Hewinsposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      I've been going back and forth on one of mine. They think the photos should go above the title and description, I think they should go below. It just seems clearer to me which photo goes with which text. They changed it, I changed it back, they changed it again, I changed it back.

      replyreport
      1. 84

         NateB11posted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Haha! Well, I hope they don't change mine back. They literally made a typo in the title. Kind of laughable.

         replyreport
         1. 89

            Sherry Hewinsposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            I'm sure it will be fine then, at least fixing the typo.

            replyreport
         2. 84

            NateB11posted 4 years agoin reply to this

            Turns out they did go back and make a correction but it was just one of those inconsistent APA style corrections. This was another funny thing I've witnessed, different editors have different opinions on APA and capitalizing in titles. On one they'll make you capitalize certain words, on another they tell you lower-case. I mean I know how and when to capitalize a title, but I was corrected (incorrectly) on it on articles so I just changed to capitalizing the way I was told. Funny stuff. Now they're telling me to do it the way that I knew was correct in the first place a long time ago. Fortunately none of it is a big deal but contradiction and inconsistency always gets to me a little bit.

            replyreport
            1. 89

               Sherry Hewinsposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               It's annoying, but I guess different people have different opinions.

               replyreport
               1. 80

                  psycheskinnerposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  The whole point of APA style is that there is only one correct way to do it.

                  replyreport
      2. 90

         Savio Dawsonposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Oh, am I glad to hear that Sherry! I have been fixing this photo and title thingy so many times in my articles, but the HubPages editors think that the photo should be above the title. It just confuses the heck out of me. Of course, they point to reputed publishers and print magazines and say that that is how it is done. Nothing against them, but I feel that the image above the title is quite confusing.

         replyreport
         1. 79

            samanthacubbisonposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            We ask that photos go at the top of the article so they appear as the featured image in thumbnails! Because of this, we often do not repeat the title again in the first text capsule to avoid confusion.

            replyreport
            1. 90

               Savio Dawsonposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               Hello Samantha,
               
               I didn't know that the position of an image mattered for the thumbnail. Maybe a bit different in my case as I have a lot of images.
               
               So, I found a midway between the two. Instead of getting the image after the description, I put it right after the title and then the description. Seems to work, I guess.

               replyreport
            2. 89

               Sherry Hewinsposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               I'm not talking about the top photo, I'm talking about additional photos throughout the article.

               replyreport
            3. 0

               Marisa Writesposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               I don't understand this.  The first photo in a Hub appears as the featured image in thumbnails, regardless of where it appears in the Hub. 
               
               There was a phase where HubPages recommended a "hero shot" at the very top of the article, but I notice the tutorial template now has the first text capsule at the top, where you're supposed to answer the question of the Hub. That's in keeping with the latest SEO advice.

               replyreport
      3. 0

         Marisa Writesposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Sherry, I'm not sure I understand what you mean.  The title of what and the description of what?  Do you mean when you start a new section of your text?

         replyreport
         1. 89

            Sherry Hewinsposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            Yes. I like to put the subtitle, then the text describing whatever it is I want to show, and then the photo. The editor kept putting the photo above the subtitle and text.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               Marisa Writesposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               Sounds back to front to me - how does the reader know the significance of the photo if it comes first?

               replyreport
   2. 66

      OldRosesposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      The editors have specific reasons for changing titles, usually for SEO reasons.  They changed the title on one of my articles and while I am not at all happy with it because it is a great example of keyword stuffing, I have left it as is because the change has not affected the traffic at all. 
      
      In the end, we all have to remember that HubPages is not our own site.  The editors and staff make the decisions on what is acceptable and what is not.  The authors do not make those decisions.

      replyreport
      1. 80

         psycheskinnerposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         These are not rule compliance changes, but editorial suggestions. At worst reversing them might means your hub does not go to a niche site, and I doubt they want you to leave editor's spelling mistakes in titles. The editor - writer relationship is meant to be collaborative for the very reason that it is in a grey area of improvement where both parties have critical information about the material (e.g. SEO versus accuracy)..

         replyreport
2. 84

   NateB11posted 4 years ago

   Well, I changed it. Let's see if I implode now.

   replyreport
   1. 84

      NateB11posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Well, they've gone on a regular spree of editing my articles. Well, they did another one anyway. Makes me think I triggered somebody! lol

      replyreport
3. 89

   poppyrposted 4 years ago

   What were the titles?

   replyreport
4. 95

   eugbugposted 4 years ago

   Change it back if you aren't happy. I do that all the time.

   replyreport
5. 96

   Rupert Taylorposted 4 years ago

   In my long experience, writers fall on a continuum. At one end are those who have a grand mal seizure if it's suggested a comma be added or removed. Then, there are those who acknowledge that a trained editor coming to a manuscript for the first time can always spot where improvements can be made.
   
   I'm at the editors-have-a-useful-function end of the spectrum. When HP editors make changes, I work from the assumption that they are improving an article, particularly with regard to SEO. And, as everything I know about SEO can be written on the edge of a postage stamp, I leave them to it.

   replyreport
   1. 89

      Sherry Hewinsposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Not everyone is one extreme or the other. There's something between, "Leave my stuff alone," and " The editor knows best."

      replyreport
      1. 84

         NateB11posted 4 years agoin reply to this

         I was thinking the same thing. I mean, I still question things, let's me know my brain is still operating.

         replyreport
6. 96

   Rupert Taylorposted 4 years ago

   Sherry and NateB11. I said it was a continuum and outlined the two extremes. I did not say it is a binary choice between one extreme or another.

   replyreport
   1. 84

      NateB11posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Fair enough. I was figuring I fit somewhere on the spectrum just not on one end.

      replyreport
7. 96

   Kierstin Gunsbergposted 4 years ago

   If you change something back that an editor changed, you risk being removed from the niche. I've been asked or seen changes to my articles that in my opinion were incorrect or unwise but I just go with it anyway because my monetization depends on it.

   replyreport
   1. 84

      NateB11posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Makes sense.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Marisa Writesposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Actually, no it doesn't.   I remember that threat - and it is a threat - being used when I was a member here years ago.  At the time, it was an empty threat because it never happened.
         
         Think about it.  If your Hub was moved to a niche site in the first place, it was already good enough for the niche site.  If an editor subsequently decides to make some changes, those are just improvements. Even without those improvements, the Hub has earned its place on the niche site, so there's no justification for removing it.
         
         If an editor makes changes before it's moved to the niche site, that's a different story.

         replyreport
8. 96

   PaulGoodman67posted 4 years ago

   Though I've had a few issues over the years, I generally default to editor knows best. I only really change something if it is clearly factually incorrect or something like that. I've had a few bad experiences, but it's relatively rare. More common for me is that editorial changes result in increases in traffic, sometimes very large. The problem with knee-jerk reactions is that you don't get to see the positive effects, which can take a few months. I suspect that in many cases writers instantly changing things back to how they were is an emotional reaction rather than a considered response.

   replyreport
   1. 84

      NateB11posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      I've complained about some edits lately but for the most part I'm okay with it. One edit did permanently reduced the traffic of a well-trafficked article, I never changed it back. But I don't care that much about that one. One of the recent edits has significantly reduced the income of another article of mine and I'm not sure it will earn what it once did. So, sometimes these changes have a negative effect and they can't be rescued. I was a bit upset. But I'm taking it in stride. Fortunately, I'm having a pretty decent run over the last 7 years. Some things could be better but I get residual income. And I like writing and I like the platform.

      replyreport
   2. 84

      NateB11posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Actually they just did an awesome edit to one of my articles, and that's usually the case.

      replyreport
9. 77

   bhattucposted 4 years ago

   Sometimes editors might be doing something based on their experience and SEO considerations. It is all right but does it actually work? How to find that?

   replyreport