I have been hub hopping lately and I am disgusted with the incoherent garbage that I am coming across - nothing but poorly translated articles of about 400 words, usually without even any formatting. I would say that more than half of the articles I randomly encounter are clearly nothing but spun articles trying to pack in as many key words as possible.
It also seems that the percentage of spun articles versus genuine submissions (ie ones where the author has actually put some thought and pride into what they are writing about) is increasing and there are less and less good articles. If something isn't done to fix this, I think that Google will penalize this site even more.
I think that you can't automatically filter spun articles. For some spinning software which are good at spinning, it is even difficult even for human reviewers to classify which are spun articles.
For duplicates however, G don't filter it, most of the times the original and the duplicate have both adsense on it. They are only reviewed when somebody filed DMCA.
Spun articles are blatantly obvious! I will flag everyone I find.
I don't know about that, I think some of the 'low quality spinning' is easy to identify, however I ran across a Hubpage today by a Hubber with 9 followers and 8 Hubpages. The Hub was massively long, like twice as long as any Hub that I had seen before and the sentence structure was off. About one out of every 10 sentences was structurally correct, and those were short sentences. I flagged it, buy I am not convinced either way.
I seen a site recently where it looks like one person created 11 accounts and then proceeded to copy and paste 1,100 articles on the site in less than about 10 days.
This one person probably within a week- single handedly destroyed the sites rank, defeating his/her own work and everyone elses.
I wonder if lower earnings and lower traffic, could be attributed to the over all "watering down of the net in general". The net is becoming a huge dump or junkyard. Its hard to compete against thousands of copy pasted articles in days.
There also seems to be an increase of virus' and scary sites and links. The net seems like walking through a junkyard, with the occasional snake or two waiting around for a victim.
I am confident Hubpages will deal with this, as it directly affects the site our rating and credibility!
I agree...the other thing that I have noticed lately is a lot of high level hubbers seem to have disappeared.
I have noticed this as well. It makes Hub Hopping feel like a chore, not a pleasure.
I flag more than 90% of what crawls out from under the hub hopping stone.
As has been suggested elsewhere, if all new members had to have their articles monitored for a certain period, that would help matters immensely, the more so if all blatant attempts to pour trash into this site resulted in instant and permanent banning of the account.
Agree agree agree! What will it take for this to change? I'm already starting to move some of my hubs from other profiles to personal websites. Not because of the whole Google thing but because quite honestly, I'm kind of embarrassed to have them showcased right alongside some of the endless trash that keeps flooding this site.
Nearly all other writing platforms require you to have your first few articles reviewed before you earn the right to post on your own. Hubpages has to do something. I'm tired of hub hopping because it's a vicious cycle that will never stop until they nip it in the bud from the beginning. It's causing more work for hubbers and moderators. I literally almost jump around and do a little dance lately when I come across a great hub.
This why I refuse to hub hop any more hubs by new hubbers until they are tested or until HP gives a realistic and truthful reason for allowing the garbage to flood in.
Anyone else think this is too much to ask for?
It's definitely not too much to ask.
You've got a good point. By hub hopping we do allow Hubpages to ignore the larger problem and not deal with it themselves.
100% agree with you Randy, the writing is on the wall.
It is also because many established hubbers who write quality material have stopped posting new hubs - so the crud is a bit more obvious!
One solution would be to place a publication hold on new authors or any author with a hubscore below 50. Most of this junk is being posted by throwaway accounts, perhaps even by bots, and
their hubber score is usually very low. This would at least slow down the flood.
It would appear to be an obvious tactic to hold new members first hub for moderation before it is published. Once it is up it has to located, read, considered and all the other hubs that spin in after the first one need the same treatment. It cannot be sensible or prudent management to let the crap flood in and then send people out to find it when a first hub must be easy to intercept and moderate rapidly. Management glitch or ulterior motive ?
Or even random hubs being held. The first one is how Xomba does it, but all you have to do is make one article then spin the rest. If random hubs were flagged for review then it would lessen this possibly.
Although I can't find the link, I distinctly remember HP staff stating that both quality and content have increased and continue to do so, as a result of their new rules and contests.
I guess someone has yet to qualify any evidence one way or another.
I'm not taking sides, I'm just sayin'.
My evidence to the contrary is that when I hub hop, almost 75% of the hubs are clearly spun - and this percentage is way up from when they first brought in the hub hopping feature. I think my experience is true of most other people.
I agree. I think there is much more garbage being produced now. They make it too easy for new writers to publish. I literally found one hub in 12 minutes of hopping the other day that I didn't flag and I'm certainly not being over picky. These things are either super short, not in English, spam, spun or just plain garbage.
I cam e across someone yesterday who has put up 125 hubs in two weeks. - all about bathroom fitments from what I could see.
The English wasn't perfect, but not bad. But then I saw a spelling error, searched google, up popped the original article.
Checked a few more. All of this guys hubs are spun.
Ok flagged and all that - but hey this is a lot more work for HP when we have spinners putting up hundreds of hubs in a very short time.
While it's true that making everyone submit one half decent hub before being allowed hubbing privileges, my guess is that these guys couldn't even write one hub so that it going to keep the majority of them out.
The current business model will not keep working. The cost of paying people to moderate these hubs will become very high, and I suspect that other methods will need to be implemented to stop the items from entering the system at all.
That is absurd! If that is really the case, then as a result of their spam, all of the Hubpages community is harmed right? If a website such as Hubpages begins putting out copied or illegible work for others to enjoy, will Google begin making that site less of a priority when indexing? Ultimately, making it harder for others to find well written articles on Hubpages?
Anyways, I agree with the initial trial period that was suggested. On other sites like E-how, they required an example article of your work before they actually allowed you to write on the site. I think that is the case for Associated Content and other sites too.
Like many of you I have seen an increase of very poor hubs, with very bad grammar, are very hard to read much less follow. I used to enjoy hub hopping, now it's like a necessity to try to clear HP from this low quality pieces.
For example Ezine will run an article through automatic grammar/diction filters and if issues pop up, then their staff reviews it. Once the author makes the corrections and it's reviewed by their staff it is then published.
Unless HP does something like this, I feel that the site will continue to get penalized by King Google.
Just common sense, Luis! I'm just a pore old dirt farmer but I work hard on my hubs so they give the reader solid information when they find my articles. Sure, I have a few for fun, but many are researched for many hours before I feel they are ready to be published.
To be lumped in with the spinners and spammers is embarrassing to me and I feel I am not alone. I do know some high earning hubbers had too many hard-sell hubs which hurt the site and I don't disagree with them being penalized by Google or HP.
But to those of us who spend lots of time before hitting the "Publish Now" button, it is an insult to allow new members free will to publish anything while we're expected to find it later on.
I would simply like for a staffer to give a logical reason for continuing this system. (I'm gonna keep asking until they do!)
I've been thinking that, maybe, the HP ads program has contributed to yet more of the "Thar's gold in them thar hills," thinking that's so rampant on the Internet. New potential source of income: Seems inevitable that they'd all come "a-flockin'" to HubPages.
Surely, given the amount of hassle and changes recently, this issue of hundreds of spun, garbage and /or copied hubs would be of great interest to HP?
With Chrome feedback, and the ability to block sites - it only takes a search and a rubbish result to close this site for good to that potential reader.
I honestly would have thought this "stop the new crap" issue would be a top priority.
It is disheartening and pointless hub hopping when a tidal wave of this stuff is coming in. PLUS we may well be missing the more clever / subtle, but equally garbage new stuff which damages the site.
There are a few simple things that have been suggested.
1. ALL new hubbers supply a profile picture, and possible a captcha.
2. All hubbers with less than five accepted Hubs are reviewed BEFORE publication.
3. ALL hubbers with a moderated spun Hub are immediately terminated and their IP address banned. Make this part of the Terms before publication.
4. When the new Hubber presses create a hub or whatever it is - can't remember - take them through the rules and ask them a few simple English questions. Weed out those who can't speak ANY English before they even start.
And so on. There are lots of ideas. The above are my personal favourites.
IF none of this is possible or acceptable to HP then PLEASE make some sort of statement explaining why it is reasonable to allow this garbage on HP.
Thank you very much.
Totally agree with you Mark, this is an excellent suggestion and I hope you have noticed that no one from HP as answered you. The reason is, so many big earners like Misha and Mark Knowles have already gone or moving to other places. They didn't agree with the way HP dealt with the issues following the Panda attack.
Consequently because HP is now losing revenue, they need more writers to make up the $$$$. This means leaving the door open for spinners and article writers to post crap here. The best suggestion is not to hub-hp at all which as already been suggested. Google will then rank HP even lower and they will make less revenue, this will force HP into action if it wants to stay in business, which is what they should have done had they listened to Misha and Mark Knowles in the first place.
Seems to me that the site has become a Black Hole. Many of the Hubbers that used to publish a lot of quality articles seem to have vanished and most of the readers with them.
Have you noticed the “Hubs by your Favorite Hubbers” list is mostly empty?
I have seen my page views drop so far off that it appears as if everything was sucked into a Google black hole, I’m sure many others have as well and are searching for greener pastures.
So into the vacuum there certainly appears to be a lot detritus floating around.
That's a good point. I have never been a very prolific author, but I have noticed that many of my favorite authors have moved elsewhere.
I think that if hubpages is going to survive, let alone prosper, it needs to be proactive rather than reactive against low quality hubs. I doubt that all the spun articles are being caught and deleted, and even if they are they stay out there long enough that when the site is crawled it gets penalized by Google. I think the only way is to delay publication of articles by any new hubbers or hubbers with low scores, until their work has been peer reviewed by other hubbers. An incentive could be given for doing these reviews, such as additional page impressions.
Otherwise, there is no way that the influx of junk can be removed.
I just wrote that...that I've noticed that some of the higher scoring hubbers have gone missing now.
Why should they publish here if HP allows junk to be continually deposited here? This is the $64,000 question staff is trying so hard to ignore! To their peril, I might add!
So what are they doing..publishing on their own websites?
Of course, and on other sites where important questions aren't ignored in hopes they will go away.
There are several new writing sites which promise more openness and honesty with it's writers and some are fleeing to those. But I have to say, where money is concerned one has to take everything with a grain of salt! But swig down the tequila and eat the lemon first!
I hope that HP takes steps to deal with this issue, I too will continue asking to see what happens.
On a side note, Apple just overtook Google as the new "tough guy on the block" Apple is now worth $153 Billion dollars. Followed by Google in second, IBM on third.
Serves Goggle right!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42954640/ns … ?GT1=43001
I think I'll go hop some hubs now. You know someone isn't interested in creating good hubs if they never participate in the forums, comment other hubs, or show up in the q and a section.
well, in one sense Google created their own monster by allowing anyone to sign up and make money with adsense.
I'm tired of hearing all the blah, blah, blah put back on HP. If people don't like it, they should do what some have done and move on- to continue blasting the site or telling HP how to run it is counter-productive in my opinion. I've blocked quite a few threads lately.
I can't believe how some feel so entitled.
And I can't believe others are so blase about it, Rebekah! I suppose it takes being ripped off by content sites a few times to understand why some of us would like to be answered by staff. Block this one if it pleases you, no one will care, I'm sure!
Blase.. not really. I simply don't see that continual complaining in the forums helps. I think there are more effective ways of being heard. Some of the threads are as disrespectful as some of those in politics and religion.
When someone comes to the table with a 'you don't know what you're doing' attitude, it's unlikely they're going to be listened to.
I don't like seeing the article spun hubs any more than anyone else and actively flag them. I do think HP has enough invested in their business that they'll do what they need to do to cut down on the constant flow of junk hubs. Solutions can be offered without shouting and flaming. I've been in management before, bring me a suggestion and I'll listen, but not if there is no trust that I'll make the right decision.
I've been self employed all of my life, Rebekah. I've dealt with many businesses who try really hard to explain the reasons for doing certain things and usually I understand their viewpoint.
I've also dealt with some who don't want to give a logical reason for their actions because they know they are at fault in some way or another. If they are honest, they will have no problem explaining their actions to those they deal with and expect to continue doing so.
Perhaps you may have an idea why keeping junk off the site is better done after it is already here than before it ever appears to the public. Use your former management experience and give me a few possible reasons for this present system. I'm all ears!
Randy, it has been explained, and extensively discussed,many times over the three years I've been here.
HubPages felt new writers would be discouraged if they had to wait several days for their first few Hubs to be published. And HP couldn't afford to employ enough people to get new Hubs vetted any faster.
Before Panda, they didn't feel it was a big problem - and gradually over time, they were introducing more and more measures to discourage spammers.
Of course, thanks to Panda, that decision has come back to bite them in the bum - and I think the time may have come to institute a vetting program. After all, Infobarrel does it and they still seem to attract writers.
Yes Marisa, I know an excuse for allowing the junk on here has been given many times in the past. Notice I called it an excuse rather than an explanation.
It doesn't take a genius to see why Google hit HP so hard. Hp knew, of course, that they were allowing low quality content to remain because some of it brought in massive amounts of traffic, which in turn, meant more money for the company.
They seem to be reluctant to remove it even now unless it is pointed out on the forums and it is then given an "oops! How did we miss that one" treatment before it is finally removed. Many have been previously flagged but seemed to slip by somehow.
I would suggest rechecking the most blatant and high trafficked of these if flagged to see if they are removed. If not, put them on the forums so everyone can see them. Enough "oops" and perhaps something will be done.
As you and I have both experienced on another site, trusting those in charge to do the right thing without checking out the results doesn't always work out well. I simply don't believe HP is unaware of the low quality hubs which make them a nice piece of change. If we know they are there, how can HP not also know they are, especially with the stats they have access to?
You'd think it would be rather simple to find those with low word count at the very least. The stench seems to be getting stronger!
A simple query to look for hubs <XXX words NOT in the poetry section would be a good start.
Another idea is to take a look at hubbers who publish more than XX hubs per day over a course of time. One person published 2,300+ in 150 days. A truly spectacular feat!
Not all of them would be unpublished or flagged, but it would give a nice list of "low hanging fruit" for the moderators to look over.
Also, there are several hubbers with hundreds or thousands of hubs which are questionable in nature. At some point, it would be worthwhile to address the account as a whole instead of individual hubs. Put the onus on the owner of the account to put their hubs in compliance instead of on the moderators or the community to flag individual hubs.
And, its time to get off my soapbox....
Nope ---- Still on my soapbox!
and before you give reasons why the short hubs shouldn't be scrutinized, here is a doozy:
"coming soon for your viewing pleasure..
coming very soon for your viewing and reading pleasure.."
Yes, that was the ENTIRE hub. We seriously can't create a filter to stop these? Instead, it takes time away from a hubber to flag it and a moderator to moderate it.
Actually, I 'd like to see MORE complaining - but let's do it in a respectful way as you say:
It frustrates me that many Hubbers are complaining on other forums where their voices can't be heard by the HubPages team - so that when I say "Hubbers are concerned about ....[an issue]" Jason is able to say it's a minor thing, because I'm the only one raising it! If we were all presenting a calm, reasoned, united front, maybe we'd get somewhere.
If you haven't noticed good people are moving on, because HP does not know what the hell they are doing any more, the cuddle the new people just to get more people to sign up, then all you get is garbage writers on here.
Adsense is definitely Google's monster. Keeping Hubpages a great place to write about most anything and keeping it full of non spammers is Hubpages' problem.
It really does seem like Hubpages is suffering from Google's careless Adsense account giveaways. Guess they feel Hubpages should handle their problem for them - but not the problem is a bigger issue for HP than it is giant Google.
HP has what, 14 people on staff? If I were in that office - I wouldn't be able to stop flirting with Simone. Basically, the best thing that has happened, IMO, is that folks who care about this venture started hub hopping and flagging more. I still think that hopping and flagging is the best thing to do to keep the site respectable. Fourteen people in an office can't do it - this Hubpages thing is a monster just like Adsense.
All HP does now is care about new people because with their own ad program, they want to attract people or 'fill those seats with a$$e$.' And when an established hubber says 'then move on' well, good writers DO move on. Plenty of other good writing sites out there.
Maybe. I don't believe their flagship Fish Pedicure program will last long if the spam infestation continues. I presume the idea of advertising is to sell to a quality audience, ideally one that can read English.
Well done you have hit the nail on the head.
As management, I would certainly be looking at alternative ways for new sign ups to publish on this site. What's most cost effective? Do I need more moderators/engineers this way? What kind of software can we use to identify content against TOS? What kind of solid suggestions have we heard from the community at large?
I think implementation of new practices and systems takes time and careful thought, and support. I think it's fair to say mistakes can be made when a system is drastically stressed.
ok, that's all for me. I'm off.
To me, this sums up the situation perfectly. All these conspiracy theories don't make sense.
Since Panda, quality is more important than ever. If HP's writers aren't making money, HP isn't making money. HP could have no motive for driving away good writers - unlike Helium, HP doesn't get to keep the articles when a writer leaves.
I think what has happened is that HP management are in a blue funk. They did a whole lot of stuff in a panic, and they know they upset a lot of Hubbers - but they're acting like a corporation, and instead of Paul Edmonson coming to the forums to apologise and ask us to give the site another chance, he's sent Jason and Simone to tell us everything's fine.
They're still in a panic and still not thinking clearly. The idea of moderators working through Hubs in chronological order, instead of prioritizing them in some way (based on traffic, HubScore, earnings, whatever they can use), is sheer madness, for one thing.
Hubpages has 24 full time staff, with more coming. Still this is not enough to review each hub. As I have suggested before, HP should ask some hubers to voluntarily moderate some hubs. A lot of us have invested a lot of time and effort in creating quality hubs and it would be a shame to see HP keep on declining, if that is the case, due to the amount of low quality, grammar-error filled hubs and spam.
The trouble with having volunteer moderators as you suggest is that there will immediately be an outcry that they will be able to use abuse their position to get rid of hubs which compete with their own hubs.
True ,but I cannot think of anything other solution at the moment
Are you saying paid moderators are more honest than volunteer moderators? Some of the present mods write too, ya know!
As far as I can see, the big problem is HubPages isn't using its moderators sensibly.
On another thread, Jason explained that the moderators don't have any priorities!
As we all know, there are two types of flagging - by Hubbers and by HP's automated system. All moderators do is respond to flagged Hubs, in strict chronological order of when they were flagged.
To me, this seems dumb. At the very least, I'd be dealing with the flags in order of HubScore instead of chronologically.
However in their shoes, I would also have
- one moderator permanently assigned to checking new Hubs
- one permanently assigned to doing searches designed to uncover spammy Hubs on commonly abused subjects
- one working through Hubbers according to their HubScore (I mean, it's a pretty safe bet that a Hubber with a score below 50 shouldn't be here).
I feel that would be a much better use of manpower.
Well I've just hopped some hubs and 90% of them are junk. It's harsh but I feel that HubPages deserved the sitewide penalty.
It's clear that HubPages isn't on top of moderating the site and we've all suffered as a result. Maybe it's time for an InfoBarrel type moderated approach?
Not being a native English speaker I am struggling with this Panda situation. Never the less I support efforts to improve quality on Hubpages.
Right now, after hub hopping 200 hubs I am sick to my stomach because clearly 98 percent were cut and paste copy or terribly spun or translated JUNK.
God Help Us that care about doing a good job. It's true - HP is inundated with junk.
Yes I've just hopped some more. The Hub staff seem to be in complete denial about what they need to do to clean up the site. Stopping clickbank links isn't going to be enough.
To my mind they need to do some analytics work and purge any hub that doesn't get a certain level of traffic. It's easy for me to tell which of my own hubs are poor, so why not roll this out sidewide?
Is a thread I started a few days back, it would be easy for HP to deindex any hub with a score below say 50 and the same for all hubs belonging to an author with a score below 50... Google would not see them and they would not count against us...
this would stop some of the crap on here...
I also make several other suggestions which have been added to.. it is time that HP took some drastic action...
Being totally selfish for a minute, I hope sincerely that the suggestion to remove hubs that do not earn does not go through!
My hubs get between 0-2 views per day now, which is about 10% of what they used to get.I put a lot of work into them, usually taking anything from several hours to several days to produce just one hub.
However, although I have tried my very best, I know I am awful at the SEO side. I use the keywords that I would use to search for that information, but it seems my mind works on a different tangent to the average searcher. Also, I worry about style and find it impossible to repeat keywords a lot.
I tried backlinking a few hubs on the sites mentioned by others. It took me hours, because I wrote descriptions of 300-500 words in many cases. The whole exercise made no difference whatsoever to my views.
If poor earners were rejected, all my hubs would go. However I do not think they are of low quality, and they seem to be appreciated by people who do manage to find them.
Wouldn't they be removing some of the most interesting and best written hubs if they remove a hub purely because it doesn't earn much?
I write a lot of history, travel and paranormal hubs that do not necessarily get huge amounts of traffic, but the people that read them seem to enjoy them?
This suggestion seems to point to the perennial niggle here - is HubPages a site for writers or a site for internet marketers. I have never seen why HP cannot happily accommodate both and there are quality sales hubs out there, quality information hubs out there and quality fiction/poetry. Even the now not permitted 'too personal' hubs, I don't see why they can't have their own section as long as they fit other quality criteria such as length. formatting etc
WriteAngled, they would be silly to base any decisions on earnings - the reason being, they recognise that most Hubs take a year or two to reach their full potential.
So if they were going to use earnings as a measure, they would also have to do an additional sort on age and only select "mature" non-earners. I think that would all be too difficult.
BTW I'm useless at SEO too. I write about a subject I love. I don't make a lot of money but I do make money.
Well, I got to Google payout just before Panda, but since then have had practically nothing from my hubs.
On the other hand, I discovered today that I have just got my first Adsense click from a site I am starting to set up. It wasn't a vastly expensive click, but not right down at the bottom either. I'm feeling rather chuffed about it. )
Is this not going to go a long way to deter the spinners?
No, not at all.
SMS verification is easily done via online services for free or very cheap.
Users who make a living taking advantage of article spinners and techcentrics loopholes online will be well versed in the many ways to do SMS verification online.
Creating a SMS verification here is more likely to just create headaches for those who dont use cellphones or have legitimate privacy concerns about sharing their phone numbers (the recent massive breach of security at Sony comes to mind)
Until very recently, I didnt have a cell phone, for almost 5 years actually I avoided it,so I would be unable to continue writing at a site I have participated in for years?
Free and cheap SMS verification services -
here is one such service - it was just a google search away, maybe one of these announcements will be something that suggests a good use of admin time one of these days! Like some advertising experimentation!
Hmmm...I didn't know it was that easy! Perhaps deterring spinners and the like are not the reason why HP are testing out SMS verification. That was just a guess of mine. No doubt they know what they are doing.
Well, if they make SMS verification part of the sign up process, then they can stop automated signups.
That would work great for stopping many in their tracks. That would be a very smart move.
If the announcement was just a way to test that the service worked right and not the final implementation, then its a great move!
I wonder what % of the blatant spinners are automated as opposed to a dollar a day slave labour in foreign countries?
I dont know about the slave labor, but I do know that there is one commonly known software that can autopost spun articles to hubpages, I always assumed HP would be well aware of it and do the step necessary to block it.
The ad campaign for the recent version can be seen at many of the IM forums, so I have been reminded of its existence and it currently claims to work. I dont have the spare $100 month to buy spam software.
I think it was Mark Ewbie that noticed the automated spinners are publishing here with a username followed by a 4 digit number. I looked today under Hubbers like he suggested and he is spot on.
I read on the official thread that for those of us who do not have a cell phone, like myself, will have an alternative way to verify. An automated system will call the home phone with a code, and we then enter the code.
Also, they said most likely those of us who have been here awhile and already have proven to write good content will not have to verify.
No Problem over there if you are still in the barren reaches of Cell Phone 'Out Of Range' or 'I still believe Cell Phones cause Cancer and Tadpoles to Drop Their Tails' town limits...
Verification works this way:
Please walk in single file to the Railway Line..
Knell down and place your Left Ear to the line..
You will gain your verification code AND a Bonus Set of Wings, as soon as the HP train has passed and assessed the impression that you left on the track!
I had not heard of this initiative, but I have to say I don't like it. I am not an article spinner, but I don't want to give them my cellphone number. What if their database is breached? Also, not every legitimate user has a cellphone and the spinners can get around this by creating virtual phone numbers of the net that can send and receive sms messages. I have seen these on other websites.
Paul says something about established hubbers not having to go through it, or there being a voice alternative. I think this is aimed primarily at the spinners and chancers this thread was talking about.
I just figure, when you've already given your social security number and home address to HP AND Google AND any other major affiliate program (not to mention any bank account numbers for any direct deposits)... what the heck difference does throwing a cell phone number into the mix make? If some breach happens my cell phone number would be the least of my concerns. I just figure technology is never 100%-guaranteed secure, so I have a few different accounts, and a couple of different phones, to divvy things up and not have too many eggs (or one sort or another) in any one basket.
We need an efficient anti-spinning software that can effectively identify spun articles,otherwise it is extremely difficulty to get rid of spun hubs.
When I grow up... I want To Be a SPAMMER
And SPIN Like a TOP in an HP Moderator's Undies!!!
BECAUSE I CAN....
Was just listening to an online seminar and the speaker put this chart on the screen showing just how much various sites, including HP, has been affected in terms of traffic by the Panda release. WOW!
HP is -87% since the Google Update. They are up their with wisegeek, ezinearticles, buzzle, associatedcontent, suite101 and others. All of whom were affiliate marketing friendly but subject to article spinning and hijacked content. Makes sense why the new rules have been implemented. Imagine trying to stay in business with 87% of your business washed away overnight. Ouch.
"Visibility" is down over 80%. Traffic hasn't fallen that much.
Sabreblade.... Here is a link to a larger screen shot of the chart... http://www.briannorris.com/hub.html
I, like a lot of other writers here have spent a lot of time here showcasing work products and styles, creating associations with other writers and building readership. Mostly this was done on my part as a stepping-stone to introduce larger works in greater venues.
And while I participated in Ad-Sense and Amazon affiliations it was not my main goal here, but by producing and contributing quality hubs for my own purposes I have generated a fair amount of capitol for the site owners, as most good hub producers have in exchange for the opportunity to publish here.
I will not begrudge them their profits for maintaining the “Free” venue we all have used for promotional and monetary purposes however, now that the time has come, for me anyway, to be able to develop these purposes into something useful and profitable for me the site has gone to “so much crap.”
It is useless, ignored and basically has become a huge waste of time.
All because, apparently, the site has violated its fiduciary responsibilities to us as quality contributors, by allowing so much tripe, and in a sense assisting the birthing of the Google monsters. Most of the readership is gone, common associations are lost with droves of quality writers, either by pulling their accounts or just not visiting the site anymore and the hard work put into search engine recognition has completely evaporated.
Hubpages has become more than a disappointment. Here is an example of the impact.
My Last hub announcing the publishing of my Novel does not even appear in the first thirty (30) pages of results to an exact Google search string for the Title of both the Novel and the hub.
As a matter of fact my website, my book distributors’ website and facebook page without promotion or even any quality tags yet, all have higher returns, and these only have the Title in the summaries and all three sites are only about 11 days old. By comparison in the past anything I had published with my byline and/or hubpages was returned on Google page one usually within a day or two.
Further, all whopping 33 page views on the announcement hub have come from either inside hub pages, (followers I assume, 22 a huge 9% response), or referrals from my website or emails. Not one Search Engine hit. I am assuming that most of the followers are no longer here.
More discouraging is the byline I worked so hard to have recognized, is now apparently permanently associated with hub pages and automatically degraded and most probably will be murdered by me when I republish.
It is entirely possible, if not probable, that Hubpages may be beyond fixing.
I have not given up hope with Hubpages. I expect it to improve, though maybe not reach former glory.
A lot of work went into tidying up HP after Panda, by hubbers and staff, but as far as I can see that work is undermined over time, as there is no mechanism to stop new spammers, skimmers, useless writers joining HP. Now the site is probably as bad, if not worse than just after Panda!
I still think HP needs time to implement the radical action needed and look forward to developments.
The day is coming where there will be some sort of vetting process for new member applicants before they are allowed to publish. Count on it. And I further predict it will be implemented sometime this year.
They should do it as soon as possible imho, as it would make an obvious improvement to the site as a whole. I suspect that the only reason for any delay is the recruitment and training of the extra staff that would be needed. Software and self-policing are blunt and limited tools if you want to clean up a site. I can appreciate that they want to keep down costs aswell, however.
posted on another forum but relevant here:
I suggest a compromise.
=> By default all articles published on Hubpages are 'internal only'
=> If you want your article published on the WWW you need to meet a set of strict rules and have the article scrutinised by an editor.
This allows people to write what they want and to join the team of writers and contribute at two levels (internal and external).
It avoids having to check every article published.
Hopefully it will enable the quality standards of what is indexed to rise to the level demanded by Google and other search engines.
If the Hub team is serious about lifting the standard and willing to cop the flack it could run a filter and change the status of 'doubtful articles' to internal only and request the author to revise the article and re-submit for review by an editor or accept its 'internal-only' status.
Something like this is the only hope of breaking the 'we are all tainted by the same brush' penalty.
I hope you're right! As Barney Fife said, "Nip it! Nip it! Nip it in the bud!"
A standard "test" wouldn't be that hard to assess. When I was teaching writing and lit, I could scan an essay in no time for organization, basic punctuation, and glaring errors in grammar. Of course, it would take me much longer to judge the insight, the transitional elements, the reasoning, the development, and such, but the staff wouldn't have to deal with those, anyway.
I would also suggest that after new hubbers "pass" the initial test, they write on a probationary status. Their hubs are randomly checked, and on their third strike, they get booted.
I'm not talking about a typo or misplaced comma here or there. Heck, I'm sure most of us have a few of those. I'm talking about GLARING errors that make the hub almost impossible to follow, along with content that's pure junk.
Call me brutal, but I think 3 strikes is generous, if they know that they are on probation and they submit a spam, copied, or poor English hub, surely they can't be given two more opportunites to try and find a way around the system?
(I am not talking about a misplaced apostrophe, but something more serious)
I know what sunforged was doing 2 hours ago...
http://hubpages.com/hop/#/How-to-do-use … cell-phone
Oops!!! I forgot to do that. Back I go…
Edit: I gave him a 4-fer; up, useful, awesome, beautiful.
Its pretty likely that cell radiation isnt good for you - and smart phones emit more radiation than ever before.
You'll find that the official line is that bluetooth and speakerphones are a GOOD idea
Its not like we have a sample group for long term effects!
Okay, I've been lurking, but I have been watching. I've also got a little experience in watching the web grow and evolve from an academic standpoint -- I was working on it back in 1993, when webcrawler and Lycos were brand new and Google was years away -- and I've been studying SEO both out of sheer curiosity and (lately) for more practical purposes since '07.
Panda -- or what would become Panda -- caught my attention in January.
It is continuing to unfold.
To some extent, the suggestions in this thread seem good: banning article spinners before the next tweak buries HP even more.
To another extent, the moderating process here seems not to be keeping up with spam as it is. If you force all writers to go through a vetting process with that same team in order to be published, even good writers may wind up going to sites that have found other ways (not 100% successful, but more successful) to combat spam.
Namely, more effective and discerning automated filters that flag a problem at publish and allow you to change your own article to correct the problem OR submit your article for review if you're sure the filter's turning up a false positive, and a proactive group of members serving as antibodies by flagging spam and plagiarism so that moderators ONLY have to deal with those reports, not actively patrol as well. I think you've got the antibodies, so maybe HP just needs more intelligent filters.
The other thing is that this applies to all members, rather than just post after post saying that new members pretty much aren't welcomed here unless they've passed a very stringent gauntlet.
There's another aspect of web 2.0 which concerns me. In web 1.0, we published content without much reference to ourselves; the content was what mattered. Now on HP and on many other sites, the content almost seems secondary: the social aspects of these sites, with user profiles, in-house points or scoring systems, badges and awards, post counts and so on seem to be worth more than what people write. I've seen comments in this thread implying that someone who doesn't sink a lot of time into the community can't be trusted to write meaningful articles. That doesn't follow. An active community IS essential, and makes a site like HP prosper. Volunteering to patrol for spam, experienced members sharing tips with newbies, efforts to promote and improve the site, and members browsing (hopping) fellow members' work to critique and encourage are all very, very helpful to the SITE as a whole, and active participation should be awarded and recognized. But the reverse -- someone who only publishes content, and for whatever reason doesn't have time for that level of involvement -- shouldn't incur a penalty. Less community involvement simply accrues fewer benefits. If the content is bad, spammy, spun or plagiarized, yes, by all means, block that!
In sum: focus on the content. Don't focus on whether the writers have jumped through various community hazing rituals. Content is the bottom line.
I am hesitant to point to my own work, but I have been studying Panda since the first January announcements which presaged upcoming changes. For what it's worth, Google "Panda's impact on Hubpages vs Squidoo." It may offer some context to this discussion.
Also, one other thing to consider, beyond spinning and spam. Good writing isn't necessarily enough. The web and search engines are moving towards a model where what matters most, for good and ill, is visitor behavior and satisfaction. Sadly, user experience is at least as important as content: you can write something fantastic, but if few people outside your own community read it and engage with it, it may be outranked by other, less well-written pages which do however give visitors what they came to find, whether it be info, answers, recommendations, reviews, or something they wanted to buy. It seems to me that HP is trying to recover from Panda by worrying about content, which is very important, but the danger is they're tweaking guidelines for the sake of what GOOGLE wants, rather than considering what visitors want. Which, ironically, may be the best way to overcome a Panda penalty.
Simone wrote a good summary on a lot of the questions here - take a look at it. She said it is taking a close to a week to review flagged hubs. Read the article - it is stickied in the forum.
My concern, as I've posted previously, is that moderators are only reacting to flagged Hubs.
There's no attempt to proactively seek out spam Hubs in other ways, which could be more effective.
Several people have suggested doing searches which would identify the worst offenders.
They could also unpublish Hubs based on score. Why not unpublish every Hub by Hubbers with a score of 1, for instance?
No one is asking for stringent qualifications for new members that I am aware of. But some of the crap allowed on here by new members prove they will never be able to be an asset to the site.
Everyone makes spelling, grammar, and punctuation mistakes occasionally and this isn't the problem. Spun spam and thank you maam does not cut it!
I totally agree that we should vet new users - I don't even have to hub hop now I just go to my feed and I can be guaranteed to find at least 3 hubs by NEW hubbers that are just spun content. And they are blindingly obvious even before I click on them - the user has no photo for starters - at the moment the trend is for a firstnamepartsurnamenumber username and they don't have anything in their about me section. So a couple of things could help this and just make it a tiny bit more time consuming for the spinners - you have to have a picture (they could provide some staples that hubbers could choose from)and they have to write at least a couple of lines in the about me page. Plus maybe (and this might be more controversial) the hub MUST have an image in it (takes time) which is no bad thing anyway but might stop some of the incessant spinning that I am now seeing!
Way too logical! I agree with you, so the suggestion is therefore doomed to die s very slow and frustrating death!
Additional suggestion is this: hubpages should delete any hub below the hubscore of 35 (2). They should also delete any hubber whose hubscore is below 35. I think this will in the overall effect lead to over 75% of bad hubs and hubbers being deleted.
Or start looking:
Plenty around here to look at.
I descended into Dante's eight circle to take a look.
There is certainly good flagging material there!
However, I noticed a number of what seemed to be genuine original hubs as well, set up perhaps a couple of months ago by someone who did not continue hubbing.
I find that sad. If a hub is reasonable and contains potentially useful information, it still deserves to be read even if it was written by someone who is not active on this site.
Did you check to see if they were truly original, or did you just judge by the writing?
Hubber Score is a combination of Hubscores and your activity on the site. If you have a portfolio of good Hubs, being inactive doesn't affect your Hubber Score that drastically. Publishing duplicate content is the one thing that can send it into the toilet (even if it is content you own).
I went down there too WA and I think this line from one of those hubs just about sums it up
'I do not know why I did not just dangle up'
If all links on a hub become no-follow if the hubscore drops below 40, why not just automatically unpublish any hubs that drop below 40?
Although the HubPages staff has made several positive moves towards increasing the quality of the content on this site, there is still tons of poorly written content....and I don't mean new writers, I mean non-native speaking writers and articles that are spun.
I wish there was a way to delete Hubs that had more than three errors per sentence. Poor quality on this site hurts all of us! I'm finding tons of content that sounds like this: I wishded to tells you about product that makes you life betters. you find informasion on the product this article.
What is being done to stop it? Can those articles go so low on the quality assessment that they could only be resurrected by two hours of English tutoring?
There are plenty of writers from other countries who contribute to this site in a meaningful way, and I do not wish to discourage them. If you can write fluent English, or near fluent English (and you intend to focus on improving your skills) then please carry on.
Should those articles be flagged under "Poor Quality" or "Spun Article?"
My way of giving back to this community, and increasing the quality, is by Hub Hopping. If you are having similar concerns, join me in making HubPages a better place!
I usually flag them as Spun Article and then put "either spun content or very poor English" and paste in a couple of quotes.
The QAP is catching new Hubs like this, but a lot of people forget that QAP is a new thing. It makes me laugh when I see Hubbers saying that "all our Hubs have gone through QAP so none of the Squidoo lenses should appear until they've done the same" - because most Hubs have NOT gone through QAP yet. There is a backlog of several years' worth of Hubs for the QAP team to go through, and no one knows how far they've got.
The "unFeatured for lack of engagement" penalty was meant to prevent Google seeing the low quality stuff - but people who wrote spun garbage probably also created a heap of fake backlinks, ensuring they get enough traffic to stay alive, so they are still visible.
by Catherine Povloski Welborn 8 years ago
I have read numerous hubs while hopping that I thought would be great if the writer did some editing or word smithing. I thought it would be nice to let people know that thier piece could be so much better with out trying to hurt anyones feelings. I have commented on a couple of pages...
by raisingme 9 years ago
I was really excited when I saw this new feature because I thought it was a great way to support, get to know and interact with other hubbers...But...for the most part, with some exceptions it is a load of garbage. When I think of all the painstaking time I take putting a hub together...and I...
by Paul Goodman 8 years ago
I know that many people don't like HP cracking down, but I personally am hoping that HubPages will continue to find new ways in 2012 to encourage the good writers on here and discourage the spammers and spinners - I really do think that it helps the site's reputation overall with Google and the...
by Kim Kennedy 7 years ago
Is it really viable to let anyone and everyone join HubPages? As hubs are now quality checked, why not make the first hub a test to see if they can join. It is obvious from hub hopping that people with little writing ability are publishing hubs. Surely they could be denied access to further...
by Christine Miranda 7 years ago
I like hopping hubs, learning new things and meeting other hubbers. However, I have absolutely no interest in reading hubs on religion, politics, poems, fictional stories or some far away place I will never visit so I skip them. Usually this is no big deal but I just hopped about 30 hubs and no...
by Mother of Movies and Series Reviews 2 years ago
I have finally published a hub that has been deemed unfeatured. I can only direct my attention to a table I inserted which was long when viewed on the mobile platform. Grammar is checked, titles tweaked, content is solid as its in the same vein as my other articles. Do you think this could be it?...
Copyright © 2020 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.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|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.|