I was surprised to find this level of censorship here and with a hub that has been published for a long time.
The hub is about how in nature many species reproduce without males, which is fact, and how an Oxford genetics professor has claimed that male humans will become extinct in the future.
It also proposes and examines a matriarchal system.
There are no links to anything dodgy, there is nothing illegal advised, there is no duplicated content, no nudity, no swearing, no racism, and on top of that it reads well and has been complimented in the past as thought-provoking. The choice of images are all good clear ones and the content is backed up by scientific publications (the professor's books)in the Amazon module.
So what am I to do? All I could think of was to change the title.
This is obvious. It was a male moderator who just got his divorce subpoena and hasn’t had his first cup of coffee of the day yet.
Ha! One of my hubs was unpublished and I suspected it was judged against Google's TOS by a female moderator because of the lack of knowledge most men would have about the subject. When I suggested this might be the problem in an email I was told :"your gender-based accusation is extremely inappropriate."
While the original moderator's gender was not identified, (that in itself was very telling) the responding female moderator went on to say SHE agreed with the previous moderator's opinion.
I'm sorry, but there are some things which different genders know about more than their opposites. This would be like me describing how it felt to have a baby and disagreeing with an article written by a woman who had actually given birth. Sorry, but there it is.
Not suggesting this is the case here, I just thought it was funny!
Hi Bard of Ely,
Feel free to send an email to our moderators at:
I'm sure they'll be glad to help you locate the issue.
Bard, when was this Hub originally published?
It kind of seems unfair to change the TOS and then go after old Hubs. It seems like they should be 'grandfathered in'.
I've been HubHopping and there is so much garbage with one or two paragraphs. It actually appears automated. To me this should a be a bigger focus than to target old Hubs.
I'd like to see active Hubbers, such as myself, helping to identify suspected "bad" Hubs. Also, more tools for us to accomplish that task.
I could not agree more!
Why don't they concentrate on getting rid of the garbish that is published on HP on a daily basis instead of unpublishing a hub because of a statement of fact that they may or may not agree with.
This is supposed to be a writing platform for people who write good quality, informative articles. There is no point in writing an informative article if you have to sensor part of the article because people may be offended by the truth.
Very good point, Laura! I take a pride in my writing and presenting the truth as I know it from my experience and research but if I am going to have to wonder whether someone will be offended or not it limits my subject matter and power of expression as a writer.
The modderators are clearly wrong in their reading of the sentence you supplied. It is not a new idea or a new sentence - I have seen the same propositon in many academic papers and it is clearly and proveably true.
Men have always been in more in charge than women - and so must <B>by definition</B> be responsible. It is a mantra of Feminism.
If the moderators are going to penalise such things then they have no business promoting ACADEMIC HUBS as they are currently doing.
On the basis of that decision they would need to remove EVERY hub that is outspokenly political, as that BY DEFINITION requires a criticism of some segment of society. They would need to take down every hell and damnation hub, every hub critical of Muslims (even by inference) and most of the religious and political hubs would dissapear - Oh !! hang on a moment - THAT would be a good idea and would raise the quality index for HP in one go !
Thank you for your support on this matter too, recommend1!
On the basis of what happened to Bard, all those religious hubs on surrendered wives and women submitting to their husbands because the Bible said so should go immediately.
I write a lot of history hubs, so am wondering if any of mine will be unpublished for a sentence like Bard's! Unfortunately for historians gender politics and PC thought didn't much exist before the 20th century, and on the whole women stayed home with the kids while their menfolk engaged in warfare followed by a bit of light raping and pillaging. Of course, this is a generalisation and there have been many strong, powerful women throughout history, but women who tried to step into the men's world tended to come to a sticky end - think Joan of Arc.
Also, because they unpublish it, you can't show it to anyone to get their opinion as to what the issue is exactly.
Hubs don't get unpublished due to community opinion. They get unpublished because an admin moderator finds them to be in violation of site standards.
If you don't understand why, you need to contact admin for more clarification, not consult with the masses.
I will do whatever I please, I wish you would stop harassing me!
I'm not harassing you, just pointing out how the site functions as you seem to frequently express confusion as to how things work administratively.
You can, sorta... what you would do is do a google search for the hub (as long as it still is indexed by google, which it should be.)
Then click cached to see an "historic" version of it... copy and paste the urls in the forum and there you go...
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s … google.com
Laura du Toit for President!
Bard of Ely for Secretary of Literacy!
Finding a way to stop at least some of the garbage from being published (as per Sunforged's suggestions) would be even better.
Is HP really planning to comb through everyone's hubs for subjective comments, or comments that *might* be offensive on Planet PC? Even if the site's ultimate direction is to become a place solely for "how to" and informational articles, I would think that cleaning out the garbage HAS to be a more important short-term priority.
And speaking of factual accuracy, why not go through all the health hubs and remove the ones that give dodgy or unsubstantiated medical advice? Or the home improvement hubs that promote unsafe/dangerous practices? Etc. Etc.
I can agree with this completely - most of the Hubs that I see are either straight forward promotion for the products the Hub carries, with (to be fair) a normally well researched but also normally 'light' comment and commendation.
Class Hubs of the kind that Bard of Ely normally produces requires a higher level of moderation than his would appear to have received.
The positively dangerous advice, questionable cults (including some so-called christian hubs) and other peculiar niche areas that could be moderated with little academic understanding of the subject seem to be all still here.
I wrote an article on pseudonyms that was pulled for being overly promotional. I didn't add any links or even my own. I asked for clarification and was then told my ads didn't have anything to do with my article. Most never do in any hub here.
I finally decided it was due to the fact it mentioned erotica writers and a few authors names.
I too have noticed the bent towards holy roller articles and anything remotely mentioning sex, regardless how clinical or educational is seen as too "mature." I think some of the moderators need to grow up.
I published it on my own website and have gotten a lot of mail telling me how great it was and how much they learned from it.
I won't be censored if I feel a piece is good I'll publish it elsewhere. I'm not a child to be reprimanded and sent to my room.
I agree that the older hubs should be grandfathered in. I respect H.P. decision to only allow hubs that are original-for example not published on other sites-but when this site allowed us to publish on other sites many of us hubbers probably did so. Therefore, many of the hubs we put so much effort into were unpublished. Therefore, with all regret, I will be deleting my account with Hub Pages and moving on.
I had the same thing happen to me a few minutes ago. I wish they would at least tell us what exactly it is that they don't like, so that we don't have to search and wonder ...it's driving me crazy.
Sorry Bard. Must be that " Net Neutrality " thing.
Well, I have not had to think about any such "Net neutrality thing" before and must admit I am not very happy about not being able to post something which is the truth because of it!
I don't know the reason behind unpublished hub so i can't comment on that. By the way, why not create another text box at the bottom for reference ? Just a thought.
If I add any more text it might make it worse not better seeing as what is already there is classed as in violation of the rules.
Can't really comment unless we can see the content ... Have you emailed the team .. they may be able to explain
It's a pity it's been unpublished, because I'd actually like to read it. Sounds interesting.
Well, it had plenty of comments and several from hubbers who saw nothing wrong with it so I was surprised it has suddenly been found in violation of rules here! I think about what I say in my hubs and make a point of not including anything that would violate terms but this has still happened!
Don't forget they changed their TOS recently - you may now be stepping in a taboo subject. I have had to edit quite a few hubs myself to come in line with the new guidelines.
It's a sad day when the opinions of an Oxford professor of human genetics, the factual reality of animals species that breed without males and the subject of matriarchy are potentially included as taboo subjects here! I have mailed the team and asked them to specify what is wrong!
I wouold lay a bet that sex some words related to it have tripped an automatic thingy - and no human hand has touched it. I would lay a second bet that an email will get it put back as is - unless there is something else about it, you haven't talked about nudibranch and other disgusting things have you !!
Parthenogenesis: the new dirty word. I hope things get resolved soon - it would be sad to see articles with a scientific bent go down because of an automated flagging system.
Yes, Leahlefler, parthenogenesis is included in the text.
It could be because of the word 'parthenogenesis'?
It's getting ridiculous.
Why on earth would someone object to that word? All it means is asexual reproduction. I wasn't aware that was such a controversial issue.
Here's an interesting definition from an online dictionary:
1. (Life Sciences & Allied Applications / Biology) a type of reproduction, occurring in some insects and flowers, in which the unfertilized ovum develops directly into a new individual
2. (Christian Religious Writings / Theology) human conception without fertilization by a male; virgin birth
[from Greek parthenos virgin + genesis birth]
I can think of one incident involving definition 2 of parthenogenesis, and there must be an awful lot of Hubs in which this incident is at least mentioned ...
That's what I thought, too. Maybe whoever moderated BoE's Hub thought it belonged in the religion category !
I do remember that when we discussed parthenogenesis in HS biology, I decided that maybe the Christian doctrine of the virgin birth might not be quite as far-fetched as I had come to believe it probably was.
Why bother? I just deleted mine. It's about MLM. And I tried to change it, but there is nothing valuable, just my experience with it , so I deleted it. I wonder, which one will be next?
More rules, less fun, as usual. I don't even know what parthenogenesis is...
I sent the 'offending' hub to Guru Rasa von Werder and she wants to include my article in a book she is writing and to republish it in a blog. I have said she is welcome to put it in her book but I want to wait to see the outcome here first because if it is republished that will be against rules too!
So, have you contacted admin for clarification?
After all, that's what admin says is the best course of action for these situations. They are the folks who not only can see the Hub, but make the determinations about the TOS...
Relache, I have replied to the email I had asking for a specific explanation please. I am awaiting an answer.
SO - B O Ely !! did you get an answer that makes sense ?
When two of hubs were moderated for low quality, I panicked because I know my hubs are not of low quality and I couldn't figure out what was wrong. I emailed HP right away to help me, and I got an email back the next day telling me I just had watermarks pics and to remove them and resubmit.
So, I'm sure you'll get an answer soon, may be tomorrow.. oh it' Sunday, so maybe Monday. Good luck!
Whats up with Hubpages... My hub on stress and Humor has been unpublished, I have a filter more stringent than HP, so they have no chance there. I just have a few books advertised, two outgoing links to my other article site and I don't know what is the issue ...
This hub was so well received that it was getting hits the moment it was published. I have sent off a mail to team HP ... I can't find any problems with though I tried too.
Can't HP give a warning before unpublishing and at least the reason
why the do so ???
Well Randy you sound like you have hard a tough time with women lately LoL
Not really, Sofs! But it does seem they think they are just as good as the men these days!
Wow, and I thought it was ridiculous that my ads were disabled on my hub about Bible stories that were unfit for kids to read. The bible is too gruesome for google. Go figure.
But the rest of this is sounding crazy... is parthenogenesis really a bad word? None of my professors ever even blushed...
does your hub by any chance have at least 50 words or more? Does it have any amazon or e-bay capsules in it? The reason I ask is because i know some of my hubs were unpublished, due to the fact that it was deemed overly promotional. apparently from reading hubpages new guide lines, you have make sure you have at least 50 words for every e-bay and/or amazon capsule you use. i don't know if that's the case for you, but i thought i'd throw that in there just in case if it is.
But, some 'featured' hubs don't even have 50 words for Each Amazon capsule. So Why feature ones breaking rules, if that is the case than?
I can't explain that one, as you'll have to ask the hubpages staff about that. I'm just telling you guys what happened to some of my hubs, and why they told me mine was unpublished. if that is the case about featured hubs, then that really ticks me off.
I have received 5 emails about 5 hubs and they have been unpublished. I cant be really bothered to change it. Hubpages are getting fussy about everything.
For one thing it would not be against Google's rules because I write on blogger and you Can say anything there and it is RUN by Google. So for some reason, Google does not like HP and now WE are to blame for this? No, it Should have been set up correctly here in the first place then. It's not hubbers' fault this place wasn't set up correctly to make Google like it in the first place. I see junk Still up and readable. I'm Still trying to figure out just What the 'standards' are now. They change too often.
The internet constantly changes. What was good in 1998 is not the same as what was good in 2003 and what was good then is not good now. What's good now is unlikely to be what will be good in 3 years time.
It's not possible to have everything within a website set up to anticipate changes in the future. Flexibility to move with the changes is important for any website and for content writers too.
I have just got a reply which asks me to revise some of the passages because the hub had been moderated for being biased against men based on gender.
So Jeebus did make majik Juju with His Mommy after all and evolution is wrong?
It would be interesting to see the hub to be able to quantify the 'bias' ourselves, it might shed some light on other weird happenings.
My guess is that the truth is that Google doesn't like it because it has long words in it and the average searcher is reckoned to be a moron; long words related to sexual 'things' especially.
They may be right, when I lived in Wales a small 'mob' attacked a house, put petrol through the letterbox and daubed the walls with pervert and other less printable words - including pedo !! the woman they were 'against' was a paediatrician.
Are you kidding me? Well then I guess the good news is that clearly if everyone is required to be factual, nonviolent and unbiased, all the religious crap will soon be coming down. A bunch of the political stuff must go as well.
I don't know what you said, but I find that surprising. Truly surprising that your entire hub was unpublished, losing all its gained, due to a couple of passages which a few men may have found offensive.
Shocked, truly. Thinking anything I value I'd better publish somewhere else.
I am waiting for the religious crap to come down for being largely duplicate content in any case, but this is the funniest moderation I have heard so far.
"Biased against men based on gender"?
As opposed to "based on them having a penis?"
What I don't like is the random unpublishing. But maybe what I think is mistaken.
Once that happens, don't you lose everything? Even once it is republished? What about backlinks? I guess if they're still in place they'll still be just as good? But you lose your rank I imagine and serp and that just seems darned excessive and unfair.
Especially considering that after all I offend everybody. You know someone will complain.
I don't know if it would be against rules here to tell you the exact wording but I am going to risk it so here is one of the sentences that a moderator found fault with. As far as I am concerned, looking at history, literature and the news of the world, what I have said is true. "Men have been responsible for wars, invasions, conquests, slavery and rape of their victims." That sentence is judged to be "biased against men based on gender." I could give lots of named examples of men guilty of those crimes to back up my statement but that would presumably make the situation worse.
Having had this happen to me has lowered my high opinion of hubpages, which is a great shame as I have always supported the site and enjoyed writing hubs. It hasn't exactly encouraged me to write more here though!
Hmmm...sounds like some of the moderators are adopting a feminist stance. I hate feminism!
That doesn't sound feminist to me. Though feminists strive for gender equality, most feminists I have known acknowledge that generally statistics of crimes like rape prove the perpetrators to be overwhelmingly male. They simply refute that men are inherently capable of these crimes, and mark it down to social influences, including rape culture.
I'm not sure how else you could phrase that sentence Bard, as it is a statement of fact and not an opinion. Are we supposed to pretend that those things didn't happen and that it wasn't men who were the perpetrators?
I have reworded it like this: "Surely it is mostly men that have been responsible for wars, invasions, conquests, slavery and rape of their victims?"
I have also stated that I cannot see anything wrong with my original wording! I agree with you that I was stating fact!
Wow. Super wow. That's unbelievable. Can't even blame it on a new moderator since they had a good deal of discussion over it and this is the final decision.
Sorry to hear that, but thanks for the warning.
Someone mentioned an off-focus here, I'm sure it was just something someone reported. As such it had to be addressed, though I may disagree with how that happened.
The most disturbing part as someone else mentioned and I agree is the unpublishing of it! That hurts! The pettiness of it is also kinda frustrating.
And you just know that if a commonly accepted statement such as bard's was found offensive, which is nothing less than common knowledge, then that is going to be severely limiting.
Well, I guess it will still be a good site for very tame writing on perfectly innocuous topics. At least this all came about early in the year.
That is unbelievable. Now we have to write something incorrect just so that we can appease the politically correct moderator? Who did they think went to war in those days and even now? Women? Bisexuals?
Great, now I have to find another place to puy my writing in case a hub is deemed politically incorrect. I'm not changing something just to please a politically correct moderator. I'd just unpublish it and put it somewhere else.
Tonight takes the cake for me. I had a hub returned as substandard stating the ad capsules were not relevant to the hub. The hub is a poem about hawks, and the ad keyword is hawk. Is it my fault the ad servers sent ads of helicopters and not birds? Sheesh.
I changed it to 'hawk birds' and we'll see if republishing it flies.
My hub was republished as they realized that it was a mistake on their sides offered their apologies, so my hub went from a score of 75 to 57 while they sat over it. I was also informed that they are training new moderators.. so much for moderation
Yes. They must be brainwashing them ! I don't write more hubs and I seldom come here these days. I find all of this issues disgusting!
All your hubs are photo hubs! What writing have you done?
I had 4 different account here. I deleted all my good hubs and wrote this kind of hubs, because HP doesn't deserve my good ones. They're posted somewhere else.
Yeah - I know what you mean !! I am much too good for HP as well but I lower my standards occasionally to publish here sometimes.
OH OH OH !!! What would you that ??? I've been here for more than 3 years, you just began.Don't lower yourself, please. You're wasting your time! Ha ha ha !!!
Your sarcasm is too silly, mate !
OOH OOH OOH - you aint the only one who has more accounts and been here a while ! you are the only one here telling porkies about moving your 'writing' elsewhere though.
So ? I've been writing here for more than 3 years. What's your point ?
I had 4 different account here. I deleted all my good hubs and wrote this kind of hubs, because HP doesn't deserve my good ones. They're posted somewhere else.
Your statement above makes it look like a recent decision, not one from ten months ago.
That secision has more than a year. I just came in here to check my accounts, which I haven't checked for a long time. If you go and see my 'hubtivity' you'll get a clue, I think , dear Watson ! lol
Ok Sherlock. Now that you agree with me that your decision wasn't recent, but taken a year ago.
Then the changes going on at hubpages at the moment, had no bearing on your decision.
My main concern is that this sets a precedent, for HubPages being able to unpublish work on a whim, without any real warning, or compromise, whenever the urge takes them. What happens if next month they come back and say that they no longer want people to have their two external links per hub, linking out to their own sites. Or something else they believe might appease Google.
At best it's going to mean yet more time-consuming fiddling, and at worst, it's going to mean a hell of a lot of wasted time here at HP for some folk. Especially considering that HP has actively promoted itself as a 'set-and-forget' content site for years.
So that while I'm happy to bring past content up to scratch (this time), as I always felt many hubs were too ad heavy anyway. I'm definitely worried that any further investment of time in HP, is going to proove to be a poor investment, for all but the HP writing purists.
Mrvoodoo, I couldn't have said it better. I'm afraid to write anything new here. And I'm afraid to recommend the site to anyone else.
I've always enjoyed writing at HP, and used to rave about it to almost anybody who would listen. And still think it's a great site.
But like you, I am concerned, that I've made HP too big a cog in my online money making 'machine'. And while I'd love to continue to write here, I can't help but question whether it's the smart thing to do, or not...
They are a private, for-profit company and what they are doing is not censorship, nor is it out-of-the-blue new behavior. In the very beginning days, HubPages allowed adult content, meaning straight up explicit images and written material. One day, they got corporate venture funding and changed the rules to disallow that. Hundreds (if not thousands) of Hubs got unpublished permanently, and a bunch of authors decided to scream and cry about it. But that didn't change the new stance on adult content.
You know what happened next? Some of those authors who had work taken down chose to leave the site forever, but some made new content and are still here making money to this very day.
What is happening on the site is nothing new. I've seen at least three different forms of "culls" since joining HubPages and, in the long term, each one resulted in the site becoming a better and stronger web presence.
lol, yes, thank you, Relache. I'm sure that we're all more than aware of your love of quoting all things TOS. And as you've explained that this isn't the first time that HP have culled content in this manner, I'm willing to retract the word 'precedent'.
However, reserving a right, and utilising it on a massive scale, to the concern of your user base, ARE two very different things. Whether it's the first time, or not. And despite what the TOS might say, people are concerned. I know I am. And that's what we're ultimately discussing.
You say that after each cull, some people stayed, and continued to make money. And while no doubt (as you suggest) some of those who left will have made none. Others will have no doubt branched out on their own, and made far, far more, than had they stayed. (I make 95% of my earnings elsewhere).
You say that after each cull, HP went on to become a 'bigger and better' web presence, well, I guess that that is subjective. As at this point in time. Google doesn't seem to agree with you.
And having hubs unpublished en-mass, at exactly the same time as losing traffic/earnings, can feel a little like being kicked when you're down. Even if it is with the best of intentions. And rightly so, some of us are concerned about the future.
Some of us are emotional beings Relache, we don't all live our lives by the TOS. As 'illogical' as that may seem to you.
We are currently in the process of manually reviewing thousands of Hubs, old and new. Those that might have slipped by in the past, or that don't comply with our new standards (like having duplicate content, or too many Amazon products, for instance) are being moderated.
When a Hub is moderated, you can always bring your Hub "up to code" and have it republished.
I can understand some people's umbrage at having to fix an older Hub (I had to fix over a dozen of mine), but we hope you understand that it's important to keep our standard of quality as high as possible. The site very much depends on sustained traffic from search engines, and search engines like to keep the quality bar high as well.
And if you do come across low-quality Hubs, please flag them! We'll have a look and moderate them if we agree.
I now cringe every time I get an email from Hubpages. I've gotten so many I now check four or five times a day to see which axe fell where this time. I don't think the site is improving quality at all. It's just disallowing everything that doesn't fit a super narrow margin of what is 'quality' and what is not.
Seeing a subject like this in the forums - and concerning a great writer like Bard of Ely - that is sad. We need to move in a different direction. Even I have had several hubs moderated and some I just can't be bothered with re-fixing. The reasons I was given were so broad, they could have been anything. I am spreading my writing around and out beyond Hub pages, because I don't know where the hammer will fall next.
I do wish it was a lot less confusing. All the PG-13 crap does my poor head in. Some of what I have read here resonates in some recent hubs I wrote about the algorithm. I am not trying to be negative. But some of what is going on - is in danger of scaring away good writers. And that won't do any good. Bard, there is nothing wrong with what you wrote, as far as I can see. A fact is a fact, pure and true...
Too many narrowly construed views are seeping into what could be defined as "offensive" or "objectionable" in some rules. And some of us are too weary of arguing our case any more. Something has to change...
If you're a Hubber in good standing--as I'd imagine most of you in this thread are--and you really are perplexed even after having read the violation email we sent you, then you can contact team@hubpages for clarification.
Maddie and Norah are coming up with more specific moderation categories, so that will give those whose Hubs are moderated a bit more insight into exactly where the violation lies.
Please don't take any of the violation emails personally! Only Hubs are moderated, not Hubbers.
You can check out this video, uploaded today, where Maddie, Simone and Norah explain what to do when you get a moderation email:
I came here to point this out, but looks like a 69 score hubber beat me to it. Did you know that you are considered sort of a spammer and your self (HubPages) promoting link is nofollow.
Thanks for posting this video which I have now watched but I would point out that in my case it wasn't as simple as is suggested there. I spent time trying to figure out what was wrong with my hub and couldn't find anything. I sent an email to the team asking for specifics but didn't get a reply so sent another. I had to wait longer than usual for a reply and the answer I was given, whilst I realise I must comply with the rules if I wish to use the site, I cannot say I am happy about in this case. I note from the responses of other hubbers in this thread that the majority see nothing wrong with what I wrote to begin with.
The reason given to Bard for being biased against men is absolutely garbage, and he had made a statement of fact, what you want him to say is a lie. I guess we cant say the Cruszades were caused by the Christians, cause that would be biased against them, even though the Pope did call for the crusades.
On a positive note, the turnaround time on getting unpublished content, published again (assuming it complies second time around), seems to be pretty swift. Considering how many hubs they're no doubt having to work their way through.
I always pop by for a moan when the shit hits the fan, so felt it was important also to pop by and give praise, where praise is due.
Great work, and many thanks.
Just keep the changes to a minimum. They do my nut in.
I didn't find any 'violation' emails I came to check n found 20 hubs unpublished. Had to move my amazon capsules n completely changed wording on ONE hub from using the r**e word to se**al assault n further shortened to s. assault but still remains unpublished. 20 hubs n drop in score so how soon do unpublished hubs get republished?
For what its worth, I read a response on this thread that mentioned that what was wrong with one hubber's hub was the picture had a watermark. So I changed the picture on my hub that was called out because it too had a watermark and it was republished...
I got another ten hubs unpublished and the other 20 still unpublished - after moving the amazon capsules lost my hubmob hub. Is it best to just delete? most of my hubs came from stuff learned in college n is considered 'substandard'?
Wow I haven't been writing that long and love it, but it seems just when I start getting motivated somewhere they start ripping things apart. I do take it personally because it's my writing and expression that's being criticized. Ive only had one not published for not being structured properly???? I wish there was somewhere to write without the spammers but freedom of expression. If they rank well and aren't trying to sell garbage then I dont get it.
by Katie McMurray 12 years ago
Don't let this happen to you.As most of you know my Mother is is failing health and I've been traveling a lot trying to take care of my Mom, spend as much time with her as possible and get back home for my kids, busy to say the least.Of my 302 hubs many of them have link capsules on them including...
by Steve Andrews 11 years ago
I have a hub about homosexuality in monarch butterflies with ads for books on Amazon about homosexuality in animals, however, ads have been disabled and in the warning why details it says: "Because this Hub was identified manually, and not through our automatic filter, this status will not...
by THEHuG5 11 years ago
I'm feeling really discouraged at HP lately. Everything was going great and then my new hubs from the past 3 days started getting unpublished for "deceptive tags" and "unrelated links" even though I couldn't find any of these issues on my hubs and no matter how much I edit them...
by protjack 15 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 sunforged 12 years ago
I wont be bothered with republishing it here.But, I just had a hub on "Little Black Bikinis" pulled for Adult/Mature ContentHere is the cached version of the hub (even though its unpublished it is still visible)http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s …...
by leeberttea 13 years ago
For adult content? Really? There is no nudity at all in that Hub. I respectfully request that the restriction be lifted. All the images were found on the web in spite of strict filters being imposed upon my search. There is nothing in that hub that anyone couldn't see on a magazine rack in the...
Copyright © 2023 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena 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.|