I had been writing for Ezine and Examiner for several months before I switched, or rather became addicted to HP. Both of these sites have categories for their contributors such a level author,expert, contributor "subject Examiner" etc.
I have often wondered if it would benefit the HP community to do something similar. Although there are many contributors to HP, there are also many qualified experts in their field, some write about 90% of their hubs on a particular subject matter.
Would HP benefit from adding the expert tag to some hubbers who have an extensive knowledge base and count with years of experience in a particular subject matter if this can be ascertained, similar to what Ezine does?
Being a prolific Hub creator in no way is indicative of any sort of expertise, other than creating Hubs. What you are proposing is a form of faux credentials taking the form of an achievement game to be played by site users and not any sort of genuine measure of knowledge or expertise.
First of all, I am asking for opinions. Second, my post clearly states "that if the level of expertise can be ascertained" (third paragraph, last sentence).
Tagging some writers as experts in a particular field might lend some more credibility to the site, not that HP needs it, but it can't hurt. Again, providing that an author's level of expertise can somehow be verified, therefore being a genuine process.
The effect of instituting something like this could possibly be to bring more visitors to the site. That's all, nothing more.
I am not suggesting any faux credentialing process, or any games to be played. Perhaps you might have misunderstood my intentions.
Sites like Ezine are sought after by readers who may have queries and are looking for knowledgeable writers that perhaps might be able to provide answers.
There are many hubs that seem to provide knowledgeable information, but the reader has to take the information on faith, which is good, if the hub is a quality one which is mostly the case at HP. But if a reader takes information from someone who has been labeled as an expert in the field of the reader's interest, then that reader is more likely to return when further questions arise.
Again, my intention was to ask from others what their opinion was regarding the proposal.
Hi, Luis - My opinion is that what you have proposed and clarified is a good idea, but it may not really be practicable here at this time, especially with all the work the staff has to do.
In theory, it could raise the overall credibility and authority of the site - but it could also be very labor intensive to track down actual credentials. However, there might be some Hubbers who might be willing to assist voluntarily with the task - for example, tracking down names that are listed in professional associations. But even then, how would the Hubber or the HP staff know - without further investigation - whether the Hubber was the real person listed or an identity thief? I'm sure Ezine and Examiner have some way of checking. Do you know how it's done?
Aficionada; Ezines bases the category given to writers on your profile answers plus your article submissions have to be checked by them prior to being published, the process can take several days. The articles are checked not only for grammar and spelling, punctuation and so forth, but for factualness, unless off course it deals with fiction, poetry etc.
As far as being practical, you are correct in saying that the HP staff is limited (there are only about 24 of them) your other suggestion is a good one for allowing some hubbers to voluntarily check the articles and perhaps credentials.
I am almost certain that adding this category would bring credibility to the site. As you know sites like Ezine have no monetary incentives for the contributors, their success comes from having readers seek them out when in need of credible answers amongst other reasons. They and Wikipedia excel at this.
My efforts and suggestions are for anything that will benefit our site. If any of my suggestions are not to the agreement of HP,staff or hubbers, then it's perfectly acceptable to me as I am always ready to listen to advice or suggestions which are meant to make HP a better site.
by Sherry Hewins2 months ago
I knew it couldn't be that good forever, but I am concerned that it's Healdove that seems to be getting hit.
by Eugene Brennan3 years ago
How about a new sub category in the gardening category? A "plant propagation" sub category would categorize hubs dealing with all aspects of increasing stocks of plants e.g. sowing seeds, taking...
by Scott Bateman2 months ago
We live in a time when anyone can post anything online and claim it is true. Some people believe such posts if they fit their preferred view of the world.I have seen many, many postings in Answers and Forums as well as...
by AlanSwenson7 years ago
Some shameless self promotion but I have 7 out of the top 8 hot hubs for my topic of expertise, Sound Engineering.http://hubpages.com/topics/games-toys-a … ering/1865Anyone else dominating a topic?
by Luis E Gonzalez3 years ago
HP is (and has for some time) being categorized (Google) as being a social site much like Pinterest, Facebook etc.Does this categorization hurt HP and its contributors? ...
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.