This is another question I couldn't find an answer to, perhaps because it's pretty random/specific.
I came across an article (about how women think) to which I have very strong opposing viewpoints. Would it be in violation of HP rules to compose an article of my own combating the views expressed by this author, either with or without naming the article (I could do it either way), and certainly without attacking it.
I basically want to say something along the lines of: I just read this article which says such-and-such about women, and I want to give a different point of view. I would need to paraphrase certain things at the very least (if directly quoting it is not allowed). But I would categorically not attack it. I would just say that women are different, and here is what I personally think.
So, is that allowed? I did originally want to just leave a comment, but by looking at the posts that are already there, it seems like the author only approves comments that are in agreement with her views.
Thanks in advance.
I link to other hubs all the time, pro & con and always with a link. I would refer to the article with a link.
Some folks such as [hubwriter.link] say so-in-so expressed in the article [huppage.link] ... yada, yada, yada
This is not against TOS. In fact, it is done all the time. There's all sorts of hub wars going on here. So, jump in and have fun.
I would have no problem doing as you mentioned should I encounter a similar situation. I don't see where it would violate any TOS, however, I am not an expert here, so others may well be the one to properly advise you.
Why be so specific? Why not say, I have read some people believe... or After reading an article on women it has been brought to my attention some people believe.....however, I thing this....
Anna, I agree with summerberrie, maybe you should keep it anonymous.
I don't see anything wrong in linking to someone else's hub in general, actually it could be a great thing, but doing so you create traffic to that hub.
If it was me, I would think twice before bringing more readers to a content that I totally disagree with.
I did ask myself if I could do it that way, but then I realized it wouldn't work because the points I disagree with are too specific to be able to attribute it to even more than one person. Here's a really absurd example that illustrates the problem I'd be dealing with:
Say Joe Shmoe writes, "I think that men under 5'0" should wear white pants because it makes them look taller. But they should never wear white in January because that's when wearing white tends to attract bees. To avoid attracting bees and yet still look tall in January, men should consume three glasses of milk every day, but only after 8pm Pacific Standard time because men who are 5'0" or under that consume milk before 8pm have much higher divorce rates and they also are at greater risk for developing allergies to salads."
Again, it's a horrifically exaggerated example, but I wouldn't be able to write something like "I disagree that wearing white pants in January attracts bees," without mentioning that I got the idea from another article or else it would make no sense to anybody where I got the idea that wearing white pants attracts bees in the first place. So I suppose I wouldn't have to mention WHICH article, but I would have to mention that I am responding to something.
I still could keep it "anonymous" in a sense, just by saying something along the lines of "I read an article whose author made several claims which I find to be untrue. 1) Women only want men with fat wallets: While of course there are some women who do make the size of a man's wallet a priority, that is not the case for a majority of us..." well, you get the point. I wouldn't need to name the author, or the title, or quote anything directly--the only thing is that if I use several of her very specific points, it'd be too coincidental to try to say that I came up with those exact same points on my own.
Sorry if that made no sense. It's getting late and my brain is starting to turn into mush. Thank you for your ideas/input.
My thinking about such a situation is that it might depend on whether you generally respect the other person's Hub (for the most part), but it may be a matter of "another side to things" or "more to it than that" but may not necessarily be wrong. To me, if you can have a "Hub war" (which could really, instead, amount of a "Hub debate" - not "war") that amounts to different sides to the same thing, that would warrant a link and a respectful mention.
On the other hand, if you just think the person's Hub was "stupid" (and I saw one of those not long ago, about women), I'd just ignore it. There's a real doozie that went around not long ago. It didn't make me want to write a Hub, though. It just made me want to slap the author silly. I guess the only thing that would make me call attention to the other person's Hub would be that I particularly respect that Hubber and/or his/her Hub and would want to treat "debate" respectfully (and with a link - and all that).
+1 And I'll add that if you think the hub expressing the view opposed to yours would in some way contribute to your reader's understanding of the broad issue, I'd link to it saying something like, "There is always more than one side to an issue..." (Unless, as Lisa says, the hub was "stupid", in which case I'd just ignore it.)
Good points, and while I would try to state my disagreement with her points as maturely as possible, I don't know what it would result in. I did not think her hub was "stupid" per se, but that is kind of what made me want to write an opposing viewpoint: To be perfectly honest, I did not like the thought of men reading the article and believing that this is how most women think. I do believe that the author believes what she wrote was true, but I don't think she knows that her views are (at least to me) not representative of the majority.
I understand what you mean--if it were something that I think a majority of people would read and think "oh bogus!" then I wouldn't think twice about writing anything. Yet even with the initial idea... it still isn't something I really have my heart set on or anything like that. I'm not in any hurry either so maybe I'll just see if I still feel like writing it next week.
Thank you everybody for the information about the rules and other insights. I appreciate it very much.
by Eugene Brennan4 weeks ago
I've had links to my own related hubs snipped on several occasions (mostly blatant lists at the end of a hub), but some links have been left in place after several snips. So is it acceptable to include a link to a hub...
by Thomas Dowling11 months ago
I give! I've searched the first 3 or 4 pages of "Getting Help" Forum and I've read the entire Link's Capsule section in the Learning Center (http://hubpages.com/learningcenter/using-hubtool). That Hub, by the...
by Kain 3604 weeks ago
I know that things have changed here quite a lot on HubPages since 2011. I have been writing strategy guide (sort of) gaming hubs. I'm wondering if I am allowed to post a link to another hub within a hub if it's...
by Catherine Giordano5 weeks ago
I understand the rationale for removing amazon capsules. I'm very careful not to include amazon capsules unless they are 100% relevant, and I can provide a personal opinion. I rarely do more than one per hub.HP is not...
by Sondra Rochelle2 years ago
Someone recently stated that there are limits to how much you can link to your own hubs. Does anybody know the limitations?
by Anthony Ferguson4 years ago
I'm new to internet marketing/blogging/niche sites so I generally browse through Google to find some good articles to read to boost my knowledge. Also I now know I can not only do this for educational purposes, but...
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.