I recall a thread where it was suggested HubPages use the word "non-compliant" instead of "substandard" in their email when a Hub is unpublished.
I think that idea was adopted?
I'd love to see the word "substandard" banished altogether from HubPages and replaced with the word "non-compliant" (or "not in compliance" if you prefer). And that means all of us Hubbers making an effort to stop using the word, too.
There's been a whole furore recently on the forum because a Hubber asked when poetry was "substandard", and some poets (wrongly) read that to mean poetry was regarded as low quality. If the OP asked when poetry was non-compliant, we would have had a different conversation.
It's upsetting enough for Hubbers to find their work unpublished, without being told it's "substandard". So let's please lose that word!
While I'm not generally a fan of PC language, this one seems good to me as well. Without the correct understanding of "substandard" (which most don't have) it carries a high negative connotation and is not very descriptive.
Non-compliant is much more descriptive and easier on the hubber.
I agree with this too. Substandard suggests below par, not good enough, which isn't how it is meant here. Non-compliant is perfect.
Not wishing to complicate things, but aren't there actually two different categories?
There are hubs that are great/fine but non-compliant to HP
But there are some hubs that are frankly substandard, because they are short, spammy gibberish?
Yes, we are talking about two different categories, and in an ideal world HubPages would send two different messages.
However, the current system uses the same word for both - and it's not just HubPages emails, it's Hubbers here on the forums. Given that we use the same word for both, it needs to be a word that applies to both!
Right now, the word substandard applies to the spammy gibberish literally, but it doesn't apply to the non-compliant Hubs literally. I'm not talking about being politically correct, I'm talking about using a more accurate word.
I'll own up to making the suggestion that non-compliant was a better adjective to use. Even if a hub is dismal, there's no need on our part to be mean spirited. Non-complaint works in all instances - whatever the intention of the hubber. In the off chance that the spam was just misguided, it saves feelings.
I wouldn't want to hurt anyone's feelings, especially if they, as most of us are, learning, trying and striving. I'm sure that the majority of hubbers are genuine in what they are trying to do, whether it is creative writing or sales hubs or providing information.
But coming in off a hub hopping session, I do think that there are some cynical, calculated users out there gaming the system for a fast buck and who really don't care about the HP community or the mess they leave behind
I should say I also never liked the phrase "Quality Hub." In that instance I prefer compliant hub. We have necessary rules here that should be met for the good of the community. I have no idea of what a Quality Hub is. For some it means using videos and pictures, for others it's the grammar. For others it means no products. Others keep comparing it to the Flagship Hub program. Too subjective to be useful.
Sorry, Nelle. Some people do genuinely care about quality in their work and undermining that care is a great disservice to the site.
Bland euphemisms don't always cut it.
Of course, you could open a debate on what constitutes quality.
I'm actually quite tired of the nasty tones of the forums lately the relish that people are taking in using hurtful tones - and I have no need or desire to continue it.
The bland euphemisms are juster kinder words. But kinds words are not the words that many forum insiders like to use.
Whatever HP central wants to call them is fine.
We are working at creating more moderation categories, but point taken.
Please keep in mind, though, that if we change it to "non-compliant" there will be accusations that we've chosen a cold, soulless word.
How would you rather be seen - cold and soulless or downright mean? Because that's how people react to the word "substandard".
Well, neither; I was being facetious (well, a little). My point is that most people will be offended that their Hub was taken down no matter what you call it. And some will object to the term "non-compliant".
But, as I said before, we're reforming the moderation categories. Stay tuned.
If a Hub of mine were taken down for being 'non-compliant', I would interpret the term used to mean my Hub does not comply with HubPages' rules. Therefore, and with no hard feelings, I'd alter it in order that it does comply. If anything, I'd be annoyed with myself for not having paid closer attention to Hubages' stipulations.
On the other hand, if my Hub were deemed 'substandard', I'd take it to mean 'below an established or required standard' rather than simply 'nonstandard'. This would obviously cause some pretty negative feelings as well as uncertainty (they think my writing is utter rubbish - what do I need to do to improve, and can I?).
I don't see anything 'cold, soulless' in 'non-compliant'. To me, it seems kinder and clearer.
I'm just wondering what the reaction would be if the poor hub reviewer just had a Friday moment and said exactly what they thought of the sub st..., sorry non compliant, nonsense that they are forced to read in some kind of literary hell.
your page was the worst kind of spammy moronic pointless garbage,
...would be one that I would enjoy sending. Although not so much receiving obviously.
As a side note someone commented on one of my earlier hubs today and I read it back thinking what the hell is this rubbish - why wasn't it flagged.
It might at least have got me to raise the bar a bit.
As Jason said, we are (and more specifically, I am) working on updating the moderation messaging to be more specific and easy to understand. I'm happy to change the word "substandard" out for something else, but I'm not sure "non-compliant" is specific enough. Overly promotional Hubs are non-compliant. Adult Hubs are non-compliant.
What it looks like right now is that going forward "substandard" will be applied to such problems as poor formatting, insufficient length, broken links, and poor spelling or grammar that interferes with the readability/credibility of the Hub. If anyone can think of another word to sum those issues up, I'd be happy to hear it.
'Textual Inadequacy' springs to mind, or just 'Text Issue'. I'll keep thinking ...
Maddie maybe just change the wording to say that "this hub does not meet our publishing standards for grammar", or whatever.
Definitely, we just need a short-hand term for display as warnings, and as the title of the moderation email.
Not one word, but two: "Quality issues," "quality concerns," or even "quality problems."
These are terms often used in critique, because they have a softer and less judgmental tone to them, leading in a more constructive direction. Like meeting the author in the middle. This is mostly about psyschology, anyway. I, for one, don't mind "substandard" at all.
Maddie, why does it matter if it's not specific enough? "Substandard" is already covering a range of unconnected problems.
Think of it from a newbie's perspective. You get an email saying you're 'substandard'. If I said that to you outside HubPages, you'd understand it as 'you're not good enough for the likes of us'.
If the writing is awful, then fair enough. But if it's just errors made by a novice on a Hub that's otherwise well written, you could be sending people away with their tail between their legs, who could have been valued Hubbers.
Even experienced Hubbers react badly to the word. Look at the recent thread on poetry where Ralwus took umbrage and left. I read through the posts and honestly couldn't see anything he could take offence at - apart from the repeated question of whether poetry was "substandard".
I started this thread as much to ask fellow Hubbers to stop using the word, as much as the HubPages team.
How about, "This Hub's gotta go. If you can't figure out why and/or if you get your feelings hurt over this, so do you!" (Only put in a big, mean-face, emoticon with the message. )
I don't think there is a word that sums up poor formatting, insufficient length, broken links, and poor spelling or grammar all at once.
Just one word?
I must be the only one around happy with the word 'substandard'. Why?
Because I don't always straight away have an emotional response to being advised my work does not reach a certain criteria or specific measure of standards.
If a certain standard of writing needs to be achieved not just here but elsewhere that one may write, it is usually not always because of poor grammar, or copied work (one's own work) or similar activity, but it is something that does not adhere or reach 'a standard' plainly set out in the TOS and/or user agreement of a site.
Non compliant has almost nothing to do with bad spelling or poor grammar.
Also something to ponder is the word or terms used to report information to a user may or may not come from a legal dept as well (internal or 3rd party).
Case in point because of occasional rogue spelling or structuring a sentence that I am informed is incorrect in grammatical usage prompts me to most often change it with many articles I produce on Ezine Articles, I often re-write said article 10 to 15 times BEFORE it becomes accepted for publication on their site.
A rule breaker does not always constitute a deal breaker.
I personally don't have an issue with "substandard", just for the record. Then again, I don't have psychological issues or self esteem, or self confidence issues either.
Here are some alternatives to 'substandard':
unacceptable, imperfect, shoddy, second-rate, inadequate, inferior
Apart from 'inadequate', I think 'substandard' is the better option for these issues.
I doubt that calling hubs "inadequate" will contribute to boosting certain people's self-confidence.
Well ... yes.
It's probably worse than 'substandard', but maybe not quite as bad as some of those others I found.
I, personally, like 'shoddy'.
I had a girlfriend call me "inadequate" before. I'd hate to be called that again!
Figured I would offer up my support for the change as well - I am personally not a fan of "substandard."
Sub-standard kind of sounds like saying "Your writing sucks."
Non-compliant sounds more like, "You're not quite following the rules."
I like noncompliant. It's a neutral term whereas substandard involves subjective appraisal. I don't think people would like it much if Google judged HubPages as substandard.
by protjack 13 years ago
Hi,this Hub of mine:http://hubpages.com/hub/Haiku-poem-Coca-Colahas been flagged as substandard (or in danger of becoming one or whatever). The Hub is a poem with a video clip. That's all that that Hub is supposed to contain, nothing more and nothing elseand your engine thinks it's lacking content...
by Williamjordan 10 years ago
How all of sudden some of the best Hubs on my account are substandar I'll be the first to say I am not the best wirter but I have improved and I have a and average amount of follwer 471 and I have 56,000 pageviews and I have deleted about 13 hubs. I am not deleting anymore tell me to leave in I...
by sonnetwolf1 9 years ago
I'm new here at HUB and every one of my hubs has warnings and I've been told that I will be terminated soon because everything I post is substandard. I have read all the Terms. I don't understand what I'm doing wrong and since I'm "punished" and none of them can be viewed, I...
by Audrey Selig 9 years ago
Is there a way to exclude hubbers who do not have idled hubs from the 24 hour review for new articles? This may be the wrong place to enter this request, and maybe it is an impossibility. It would be nice if staff could facilitate the process of newly written material.
by Dan Harmon 10 years ago
Along with the Google effect lately I've seen a lot of forum posts about spam, and every time I hub hop it is obvious that there is a lot submitted here of both spam and simply substandard hubs.I would suggest that the following rules apply to the first 5 (or 10 or 20?) hubs by any new...
by Carolee Samuda 8 years ago
I was hub hopping and had to flag a few hubs for being substandard (word count). One hub had exactly 10 words and 2 photos. There should be a way the system prevents you from publishing a hub like that except if it's in the poetry section.
Copyright © 2021 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|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.|