I thought I read the new rules about word count and Amazon links, etc. and I put in the time to fix every single hub that was on the list that HP emailed me.
Apparently some hubs didn't make the list and now I'm getting about 2 emails a day telling me that a hub of mine was unpublished for violation of that rule (50 words per product link).
Yesterday I fixed one and submitted it for review and publication. Then I got another email about that same hub that said "Violation: Promotes site(s) or product(s) unrelated to Hub content."
The content/topic is cheap xmas gifts - I reviewed the hub and it looks good to me, so I email the HP team and am then told that my RSS feed to my latest hubs count as links unrelated.
I include an RSS capsule of 'my latest hubs' in just about all of my hubs and this is the first I am hearing this.....am I just being dense??
It's not bad enough that my traffic has exponentially decreased and, in turn, my earnings? I must say that I'm a little put off and fed up!
You might have just explained to me how hp staff has declared that one of my hubs has links unrelated to the content.
I know for certain that I had never seen the "watermarked or pixelated image" thing in writing before today. But that hasn't stopped them from unpublishing five of my hubs in the last 48 hours. I don't mind replacing pictures, but they could certainly make the whole process a hell of a lot simpler and painless by telling me or "us" which picture causes problems, and if an RSS capsule presents unrelated links, then it seems as if they are demanding that we only use customized RSS feeds, and that is something I've not learned to do as of yet.
I'm all for improving hubpages, and keeping this site top notch, but I've been here over a year, and so I think that they should be more thorough in their explanatory e mails.
And I've been flagging Hubs for those violations when I saw them for at least the past year.
A visible watermark is one thing; but I'm not finding visible watermarks on my un published hubs; so there must be something more to it. Low resolution pictures - I saw one that I probably should have replaced a long time ago, not a problem. Changing pictures increases traffic.
Is there a link to the rules that specify these as violations or...? That would definitely make it much easier for hubbers running across these issues. Or is it just a casual mention somewhere?
I've searched and re-read the emails and haven't been able to find anything other than hubbers mentioning the above.
Thanks in advance~
All you have to do is click the flag button on any Hub and all the violations are detailed right there. Or read the section called " Flags and Definitions" on this one, http://hubpages.com/hub/Hub-Content-Guidelines
Thank you relache. Your hub definitely touches on some good points.
I definitely think for clarification they need to add a blurb regarding RSS and what is and is not acceptable use of that capsule. For so long, so many have suggested using that feature to promote "your other content". It seems two minutes to include that commentary, and provide some details to users, could save a lot of headaches for them and hubbers alike. IMO
Who has promoted that? Like I said, I've seen it discussed several times, and the advice from the more experienced Hubbers has always been to promote your RELATED content, not your latest Hubs on any old thing. But I see so many newbies coming on board, thinking that's the thing to do, I often wonder where they get the idea from!
I'm not a newbie and yet that's what I have been doing, Marisa. I wish I could tell you where the suggestion came from but I can't remember, although I'm pretty sure it was from an experienced Hubber or two because I have only taken advice since I've been here from a select few who are well-known for being knowledgeable and successful here. Perhaps I took it too far by doing it on a vast majority of my hubs, who knows. The question now is do I go ahead and work my way through my 300+ hubs and get rid of all "My Latest Hubs" RSS capsules or do it as the HP team unpublishes my hubs???
They get the idea from visiting other hubbers and finding the links to 'latest hubs', 'hot hubs' etc at the top of the page. I guess the obvious signal it puts out is that is the way to do things if Hubpages rates it so highly. Isn't this 'feature' also a link of the kind that goes against Google flow ?? Maybe we should unpublish the whole of Hubpages till they fix it - then leave them waiting to see if they have got it right for a week as we get around to putting them back up when we find time ?
Not to be nasty or anything, but you should watch how you throw around "they" because you are not answering for me at all - that is not at all how I came across it, so you should not assume that and make a blanket statement to that effect.
This was in reply to the question of where do NEWBIES get the idea - nothing at all to do with you, or about you, or inferring you in any way whatever.
Sorry - my bad! I didn't realize - thought you were making a general statement...
I read a reply from admin in another thread where the answer was that an RSS feed of the person's latest Hubs placed on every Hub was being viewed as duplicate content.
Suffice to say it would appear that admin is no longer considering just listing lots of links to your own Hubs as relevant or value additive content and that sort of standard repetition is no longer valid.
I think this is the post relache is referring to.
The reason that I got into the habit of including RSS capsules in my hubs was because somewhere someone here thought it was a good way to keep the hubs "fresh" to Google since "latest" hubs, assuming more hubs continue to be written by a hubber, would be continually changing. Did I explain that well? Anyway, I guess that is not the current thought anymore??
I use RSS capsules, but I don't use them to promote my Hubs in other Hubs. I use them to bring a small amount of new and related content to the Hub from a highly-relevant source.
If I had 30 Hubs that all showed the same thing, even if it changed frequently, that would be a lot of duplicate content, not something fresh. Or at least that's how it seems to me.
You're right. I was looking at it on an individual hub basis, not as a whole.
When you say you I use RSS to bring a small amount of new and related content to your Hub from a highly-relevant source - you mean your RSS content is from other websites, not HP at all? If so, does that not make you at risk of losing traffic to those outside links?
That is why I place the RSS feed capsule near the bottom of my hub, after comments. The viewer has read my hub before reaching the related information.
My RSS feeds are at the bottom of all of my hubs, too, although I think right above the comments rather than bellow....but if the feed is being viewed by HP and/or Google as duplicate content then it doesn't matter where the capsule is located.
In the RSS feed I select "show first sentence only." And I normally stick to just 2-3.
If I add a RSS to my related hubs, then I choose the category of hubs only that are related to the hub I have written. Then only add a few at the most and limit them also to first sentence.
When someone adds the same RSS feed to same category or "Latest/Best/Hot Hubs" across all hubs then they will create a problem.
This was my take from another thread where someone had done this and was told they had too many of the same links from their own hubs.
It seems to me if Hubpages doesn't like us using lates/best etc...then they should not PROVIDE it!
Lily Rose, I could have written this post! This is me exactly. I'm getting hubs unpublished and when I go through them, all they needed was the default Amazon capsules set to 1 (even though they only showed 1 Amazon product) instead of 3.
I am still waiting on admin getting back to me about one hub they have chosen not to accept even though it has the correct numbers of Amazon capsules per 50 words.
They say it has unrelated links or products.
It has a related rss feed - promoting office products which I think is related to the hub in question. (The hub is about wireless computer mice).
When I look in the hopper and see the kind of sh*te some people are publishing, it does kinda make me wonder where their priorities lie.
I'm happy to see that people who typically out rank me are having these same problems, otherwise I'd develop a persecution complex.
Happy to see my score up to 95, i's been 93 a lot recently. I know they say score doesn't matter so long as it is above 75, but coming on top of losing my traffic and my income it's disheartening.
Oh and I just heard back from admin. It was the rss feed, even though it was (IMO) related.
If this is a new ruling, we need clarification, because I have a lot of hubs with unrelated rss feeds through the 60DC for one thing.
I didn't actually mean to say that I was HAPPY that other folks were having problems. . . .at least not exactly.
I put a maxes out RSS on every hub I do. If that is the "problem" then soon I'll have over two hundred unpublished hubs.
Were they to explain to everyone that that is exactly the problem - then I could spend a day taking out the feed, and replacing it with related links of my own hubs. I hope that it doesn't come to that, as that would be, probably, a whole day spent at the thing.
LOL no worries I know what you meant
But since I learned about feeds, I've grouped hubs but not necessarily through HP groups. I've made little unique feed names for hubs I felt went together.
So the hub I was talking about went with office related products because anyone looking for a computer mouse, may also be looking for any product really to do with computers, printers etc.
As it turns out, I have more than one hub related to mice, but not the minimum 8 or so I would like to see in a feed.
I was never one to put my hub latest and best or whatever in a feed because it messes the ads up unless all your keywords are the same or similar.
That was the only thing I would say against the 60dc feed, the ads got confused with the seemingly unrelated keywords, but we still put the feed in because we were helping each other.
Am I being dense here - but isn't the link to your other hubs related because they are by the same author ? or will public libraries follow the trend and start categorising by title first from now on ?
I think you've made a PERFECT point here. I hope that everyone sees it.
Actually, the analogy is not a good one - most libraries use the Dewey Decimal System which categorizes by subject matter, not by author or title (fiction is usually the exception, where books are filed by author).
To continue the analogy, however, I removed all my rss feeds for latest or best hubs but left those that reference only hubs I have put into the same group. These hubs, I feel, are relevant as they are of a similar subject matter. Automotive hubs, for instance, will have an rss feed that shows all my hubs written about cars, but not those written about shoes or politics.
I have used these feeds for some time now and believe that I gain considerable traffic from readers bouncing from hub to hub - they find a link to something similar and follow it.
"Relatedness" (if there is such a word!) is judged by keywords. The author's name isn't a keyword so it wouldn't be taken into account.
This topic has been discussed quite a few times in the forums - long before the Panda update - and I've always understood it's not a good idea to include a RSS feed of your latest Hubs, especially if your Hub is short, because all the unrelated Hubs in the feed are diluting your keywords.
I do what Sunforged suggests - use a RSS feed but make it to my latest related Hubs.
I asked this specific question in the forums, when the new rules came out. I am pretty sure someone answered my question and if my memory recalls, it was Sunforged.
I don't remember what thread it is in, but he didn't seem to be concerned with it. I mean, if HP is making RSS feeds "duplicate" content, then that would be a mistake in and of itself.
However, if the feed itself isn't related other than 60DC, I don't see any advantage. I would see an advantage, like HubMob, but the 60DC isn't a Hubpages Program, like HubMob.
But, I would agree that HP does need to clarify a few things for members. Straight up answers would be helpful and go a long way.
As for me, I removed all RSS Feeds from almost all hubs. I have a some still running. I'm trying to figure out if there is any benefit to specific hubs. So far, I'm still working on that.
They are tightening things because of the Google slap and don't want our stuff to look over promotional or spamish!
Oh, I realize that, but this detail was a surprise to me as I don't recall reading anything about it within all the other new rule changes - and by some of the other responses here I am not alone. That's not to say that I don't understand it, but to surprise me with unpublished hubs daily due to this when I already completed my mass edit based on the hubs that the HP team emailed me .... well, no fun at all...
I read something about excessive links (of the hubber) and RSS feeds possibly being counted as overly promotional and duplicate content, but I don't know if it officially says this anywhere.
That's what I was looking for - perhaps it's there somewhere, but I can't find the info and this is the first I hear of the RSS feeds counting toward it...I suppose it makes sense (to an extent) but it caught me by surprise and it just added fuel to my fire (sorry, having a run of bad days here at home...)
On a percentage basis, with your number of hubs, and checking your profile; you can expect much, much more to come.
Am I reading too much into what you're saying here because it almost sounds like an insult of some kind ... or are you just saying that because I have 300+ hubs and if they all have RSS feeds that I'll be getting a lot of emails because of that??
I inserted the link above in which Paul Deeds addresses it, but I haven't seen it in an official thread announcement, unless I missed it.
If someone has an RSS feed on all of their hubs of their latest hubs, hot hubs.. it would be considered duplicate because of the summary which shows up on each link on all hubs.. at least that is how I understand it.
Well yes they are going to show as duplicate content because they are feeds not links and so are not designed to be changed. If this is the problem then I suggest HP delete rss capsules alogether.
Another great point. What is the use of the RSS capsule if the links are unrelated. Do they really expect us to ONLY write about similar topics all of the time?
In the context of his comment on the link, I'm not sure if she had feeds or link capsules on her hubs.
IDK, it needs to be clear for everyone. I can see how it might mess up ad placement or appear spammy if someone has 20 unrelated links or feeds on all of their hubs.
that's all, I'm off for the night.
I think what HubPages is flagging RSS capsules for is along the same lines as when people put the same link on every one of their Hubs. If every Hub has the same exact RSS feed of latest, best or hottest hubs, that is s lot of duplicated content, and it's not relevant to the content.
Personally I hope this move results in a reduction of all those actress photo hubs that only have a paragraph of text and are then filled up with RSS capsules of the author's other hubs.
I put a watermark in some of my completely original, designed, and made by me graphics. Does this mean I can get in trouble for them? Many of them are completely unique to Hub Pages.
I feel like a fool with brain damage here trying to follow the topic of the RSS feed. I deleted most of my feeds except to a few that are related to each other. (Example: my La-Chon hubs)
Does this mean that I need to delete those also or I can use them? I used the word La-Chon to organize those hubs so that people looking for extra information on them wouldn't have to browse through so many of my hubs.
Now, after reading this, I am wondering if this violates the "new rules" since I'm not understanding what HP wants done with the RSS feed.
If someone could clarify this I would be grateful. Thanks!
That makes two of us with damage . Like you, I make RSS feeds to similar hubs about similar topics, or at least topics that I think the reader might actually be interested in.
I'm going to leave mine (one feed per hub, showing 4 or 5 links) until I hear different.
Thanks for this thread Lily Rose. Now off I go deleting rss capsules. Whoo so many things to learn.
HP really needs to have some blog posts on these issues. The last post I saw about RSS feeds was:
Second, we found that Hubs which successfully maintained their traffic were much more likely to judiciously use the Amazon, eBay, news, RSS and link capsules, so we ask if you choose to add news and RSS capsules, you make sure that you have plenty of original content in your Hub to accompany it and that you write at least 50 words of text in your Hub for every product you feature in your Amazon and eBay capsules.
from http://blog.hubpages.com/2011/03/things … your-hubs/
There has been allusions to new rules (which is great) but I haven't seen anything recently. I would be surprised if HP is enforcing a new rule that hasn't been published.
I was told that the "website review" hubs that titled to make the viewer think that they are at the website's login page are now against the rules, but the moderators haven't yet taken action against the abusers of this "technique". I assume that HP is actively working to update the rules and then allow people to make changes before they start unpublishing them.
Oh, but they are enforcing and they are unpublishing...and I have NO "website review" hubs.
That is bothersome to say the least! I have had a few unpublished because of the 50 word rule, but they were republished fairly quickly. I can't see how HP can enforce the "double secret" set of rules without telling folks what they are. I use RSS feeds on most of my hubs - yikes!!!
Yup, that's what prompted my start of this post - because I've been getting occassional emails about unpublished hubs due to the 50 word/Amazon rule but when this one particular hub was still unpublished I was made aware of this new (yet unwritten?) rule that floored me...you and I are in a similar boat with out number of hubs!
What kind of visitors will bother with the feeds? I'm guessing none.
The news capsules were purely designed to deceive Google into thinking the page was getting regular updates. Google obviously doesn't like these kinds of deceptions- though it likes genuine updates. There is now some evidence that pages getting over regular (automated) updates are being penalized.
If you look at any of your pages and see something completely useless, annoying and distracting, why not get rid of it?
I never understood how people got away with that, I know as a viewer if I was searching for a specific site and found one of those, I would not be happy, and it would reflect on the site imo. Now that google users can block sites, that's the kind of stuff that could get sites blocked.
After I had written my first 50 or so hubs I woke up to RSS feeds. So I went back through all of them adding a Latest RSS feed, thinking people might like a page and want an easy way to read something else.
I have to say that mostly they didn't - but at least it was refreshed content or whatever.
So anyway, recently I went through 80 hubs removing all the RSS feeds.
I'm rather hoping RSS doesn't come back into favour as I don't think I could bear another mass edit.
My very limited traffic, stats and experience do indicate that Groups are slightly more successful than RSS feeds in terms of persuading a visitor to look at another page - as long as the Groups are targeted and not just "BestStuff" or similar.
Your actually one of the few examples of someone who SHOULD be using a latest rss feed.
For traditional commercial writers its pretty much space cadet, unrealistic thinking that would suggest ones amazing iPhone review would make a reader want to read your latest hubs on some completely unrelated topic, plus the marketer/salesman in you should tell you that a reader that would click from a hypothetical iphone review to a Movie review hub is probably not a sale or click on either.
The use of author rss feeds should really only be along topical/categorical lines.
That being said it is quite distressing to hear that HP is now taking up a stance that they will pick and choose whats related.
Im pretty sure I can show a semantic, search, categorical etc relationship between just about anything and Im not about to take time to explain what my motivations are when creating these relationships (I would play a "trade secret" card) .. grrrr, We should be able to just do a scrabble/jeopardy/trivial pursuit challenge against any of our potential editors or moderators .. after whipping them soundly, we can then say , "move along,son" go bother a spammer
Anyways, back to you Mark .. you have a fun, irreverent and entertaining voice. It actually is quite likely that a reader would want to read another article you wrote regardless of topic, not quite sure how that voice is working for sales! but its entertaining and time well spent.
I submit that you should have "Ill link any damn content I want in my rss feed because Im awesome and people will read whatever I offer them" card
I mean that. I'll print up the card but I dont think its honoUred here, ive tried playing it myself a few times, to no avail
Lol sunforged, and thanks. I'm dammed if I'm going back through them all again!
As for how it's working for sales - ah, well, it isn't of course. High author score, nice comments but little traffic and no money.
But I won't moan this time. I'm loving it, think I'm getting better and at some point maybe I'll find the right way to make some money at it.
Exactly what happened to me, except now I have around 300 or so hubs that need to go through a mass edit to remove RSS feeds ... I know many have "related hubs" feeds but many (dare I say most) have "latest hubs" feeds.....uuuggghh!
It would be interesting to know if removing the RSS capsules affects your traffic in a positive way...
Hi Lily, not sure if you are asking me, as once the posts start to do their sub level thing I tend to lose track....
I didn't notice any difference in traffic from removing RSS feeds. No loss, no improvement. But with all the changes it's hard to see what affects what.
This thread is, thankfully, answering my latest query ~ why has my hub been flagged?
It must be my RSS feed to 'my latest hubs'.
This capsule addition was advised, on the site, by a usually reliable hubber.
And I cannot see why it is wrong to inform readers of one's other hubs ~ related or not.
If linking to one's own hubs is considered a 'violation', which 'Promotes site(s) or product(s) unrelated to Hub content', then something seems very wrong to me!
I agree and if it is so wrong then why does HP provide the link in the first place?
Your RSS feeds of your hubs are mainly for promoting your hubs off of Hubpages. For instance, I have an RSS feed of my hubs that feeds to Twitter. Why not link to your related hubs instead in a link capsule.
How do you add an RSS feed to Twitter? I rarely use Twitter, because I just haven't gotten into it yet. But I'm willing to try anything that sounds like it might help !
I like using twitterfeed. I have a Squidoo lens on how to do it if you want a step by step.
Yes, Brie, I agree ~ it makes no sense.
I was told, before, that the news capsule was also a no-no, so why are these capsules available, if they are just going to get us criticised or unpublished?!
I went through my hubs, adding all these extras, just recently, and now I have to go through them again.
Well, I am getting really annoyed now!
After the first e-mail, I removed any excessive Amazon links.
After the second e-mail, I removed all RSS feeds.
I have now received a third e-mail:
'Violation: Promotes site(s) or product(s) unrelated to Hub content. ... To rectify: Remove all links or Amazon/EBay capsules unrelated to your Hub's topic. You might consider adding more original content, and relevant, legitimate links to other online resources that complement this Hub's topic.'
I have no ebay links and my Amazon links are all relevant.
I do not write spam, or link to rubbish, or add Amazon links that are not relevant. My hubs are mostly quite long and of a relatively serious nature ~ yet this makes me sound like a troll, who posts a few bits of nonsense just to add a lot of irrelevant Amazon links!
I am not happy at all!
And there is no return e-mail address.
Could anyone let me know how I can contact whoever is making these decisions, please
You will not get far with this as there must be something in your hubs that triggered whatever is happening - and so you are by default wrong before you start.
This does not make you wrong in your criticism in my opinion.
I have a hub unpublished for what appears to me to be extremely vague reasons, I have done some 'stuff' to it and put it back up for publishing - and it is still there in green a week or so later waiting to see if my guess is correct or not.
Someone advised me to e-mail Maddie, so I did. Hope that was ok
This is complete and utter bullshit. We wrote here at HP and were ENCOURAGED to use picture, rss, video, maps, news, and all the other capsules BECAUSE it enhanced our hubs and would be beneficial for reader experience.
Now we are told that using them is no longer beneficial and it is a violation of terms if we have used them in the way that they were meant to be used.
If we create a series of hubs that are related, the best way to let a viewer know of others in the series is through an RSS link, the blurbs for which are generated by HP by them grabbing the description for us.
If I publish a book then all of my titles are made available to each reader. So it is HP's fault that these problems have occurred. But it is us that feel the consequences. I suggest that all of this could be handled in one single program change.
The RSS module can be changed easily to just show the title link to each hub in the feed. Get rid of all the options for 'first sentence', long and short description, at a swoop. The hubs using the RSS feed now would then have the descriptions removed, by HP, and all would be ticketyboo regarding duplicate content.
Doing this would save inordinate amounts of wasted time on behalf of all those that have used RSS feeds, and the HP staff who could then concentrate on re-publishing content that falls foul of other arbitrary violations.
Another thing it would do is diminish the negative feelings that I am sure the majority of writers are now feeling.
HP is losing the trust and commitment of loyal writers because of these sledgehammer tactics.
I for one am very close to saying to HP:
But you lose coz I am sure there are a lot more hubbers like me that are resentful of their hubs being unpublished without a bye not leave, or seemingly any understanding of the time, effort and FRUSTRATION when a hub is 'marked' not once, or twice, but more times and unpublished at every change that HP makes to its violation reasons.
What next, "sorry your hub is in violation because we just thought it a laugh to make you go and make some changes that are not really necessary but we must make it look as though we are doing something!"
We must kowtow to Google!!!!!
Humagaia, I am not sure if you are railing against what I said or not.
Nevertheless, using RSS feeds to publicize hubs outside of Hubpages is still worthwhile.
You don't need to kowtow to Google -- unless you want to make money. On that note, if HP doesn't make money, then there is no more HP, plain and simple. Contrary to what you may believe, they're not running this site out of the goodness of their hearts. They're not here to encourage budding writers or to help you get your writing read by the masses. It's all about money. It's a business.
The online world is constantly changing. Writers, webmasters and bloggers must adapt or they shouldn't expect much. That's just the way it is.
Yes, the business reality is that Google is primarily what drives traffic to sites. HP has lost traffic, and they are doing what they believe to be the right thing to get it back.
While you may not agree with their methods, you cannot deny that they are taking action.
We have no idea what conversation has taken place between HP and Google.
I know there are new rules coming soon but it seems more than a little disingenuous to enforce rules that haven't been published yet.
I have no problems holding folks accountable to violations of PUBLISHED rules, but I think it opens up HP to issues when they take down money-earning pages from people who are following the rules currently.
I am interested to see if there is "more to the story" from HP perspective. Are there rules that have been published regarding RSS and News modules?
by Marisa Wright6 years ago
Whether I agree with HP's new policies or not, I respect the site's right to set their own rules. However, I think one of the reasons Hubbers are getting upset isthey're getting warnings based on rules they don't...
by Peter Dickinson6 years ago
I recently had a hub unpublished by HubPages because “Unrelated links or products”. First time I have come across one of these. I read and re-read my hub several times. Every single one of the links was related to...
by Mike Russo5 years ago
I'm trying to understand RSS feeds. I think the capsule is a reader that aggreates feeds from other websites, but I'm not sure
by Cagsil6 years ago
Hey Staff,Please get your moderation team on the same page. I am beginning to get PISSED OFF at their incompetence.Last time I checked, RSS Feeds are allowed to be ON hubs and must be relevant to the HUB.I am getting...
by Sherri6 years ago
I really can't point any of you to the many discussions there were about whether RSS feeds that display our own Hubs in a specific Hub of ours are a violation of the HP rules or not.I read info that the...
by Marisa Wright6 years ago
There has been a discussion thread about this, but I just wanted to alert other Hubbers to it.You will receive a warning email about some rule violations - but for some, your Hub will show a warning on the Hub itself,...
Copyright © 2017 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.