Better review before acceptance to vertical sites

1. 93

   melbelposted 6 years ago

   I've come across a couple hubs that have really awful spelling and grammar but are on vertical sites. I know the vertical sites are HubPages' way of cherry-picking the best content, so how do these articles make it through?
   
   Example lines from one hub on a network site:
   "What will the future holds for HubPages, no one knows."
   "I have published hubs on all kind of topics..."
   "It just take advantage of how..."
   "...and it is manged through a PayPal account Only."
   "This just mean that you want to be..."
   "...with a combined assets of over..."
   
   The whole hub is rife with issues. I don't mean to pick on this one hubber, but I have seen content like this on a number of vertical sites.

   replyreport
   1. 85

      TIMETRAVELER2posted 6 years agoin reply to this

      I would report any hub, no matter where it is located, for having such poor grammar, spelling, etc.  It to the benefit of every person who works for or on this site that we do this.  Low quality work is what almost ruined HP, so we can't afford to have this happen again.  If we call attention to such poor work, the team should address the issue.  If they don't, then we should contact Paul or Robin directly about it.  We finally have a good situation here, so we should do all we can to protect it.

      replyreport
      1. 80

         Nancy Owensposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         I agree. Sometimes it takes a little pruning to create a healthier plant.

         replyreport
2. 86

   Marisa Wrightposted 6 years ago

   It's possible those Hubs were part of the initial tranche of Hubs moved to the niche sites.
   
   The only criteria for the first tranche was Google traffic - HubPages used the top 20% of Hubs as the basis for the niche sites, on the basis that they must be good if Google loved them.
   
   When the Fred update hit, they realised their mistake and they are now going through and checking all those Hubs for quality, I believe.

   replyreport
   1. 96

      Glenn Stokposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      This is all true Marisa, but as long as the author leaves it alone, it will not be caught. They only re-check hubs for quality when they are updated. I know, because every time I update a hub on a niche site they send me a congratulatory email saying it still meets quality guidelines. However, they don't check every one when updated.
      
      I found the one melbel was referring to with a search of the first example. It's worse than those examples indicate. The author included a screenshot of this earnings page, which is totally against TOS. I can't believe that HubPages accepted that one for Letterpile even at the beginning stage of the moves.
      
      In addition, it looks like this one was updated a couple of months ago. It's disconcerting that they don't seem to check every hub when updated. I'm sure they would have rejected the posting of his earnings if they saw it.

      replyreport
      1. 86

         Marisa Wrightposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         They are caught on SOME of the niche sites, but you are right - it's only the niche sites that were affected by Fred.   I've had notifications for several of my Hubs, saying they were under review even though I hadn't touched them - but from memory, they are on HealDove and perhaps one or two others.

         replyreport
         1. 88

            lobobrandonposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            Caloriebee too has been reviewed.

            replyreport
         2. 96

            Glenn Stokposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            Oh yes indeed! You are so right about HealDove. That was hit the worst by Fred, and so they were being very careful with that one. Most (if not all) of my HealDove hubs were re-checked even though I didn't update them. I received the same emails, unexpectedly, saying they were each approved for quality.

            replyreport
3. 93

   melbelposted 6 years ago

   I offered to volunteer to edit hubs for HubPages, but they weren't interested. There was a wildly popular hub on the education site that was factually incorrect and also contained spelling/grammar mistakes. I emailed suggested changes to HubPages and they weren't interested, so I just dropped the subject. I know it was popular and all, but the changes were small enough to not be significant (but large enough to make it look more polished.)

   replyreport
   1. 85

      TIMETRAVELER2posted 6 years agoin reply to this

      There must be a good reason for them to say no to you.  It probably isn't a good idea for hubbers to edit each other's work.  Hard feelings, etc?

      replyreport
4. 87

   Robinposted 6 years ago

   In our initial push to move to Network Sites, we moved thousands of articles in the span of a few months.  Every article was assessed, and we did reject some articles even if their traffic was high.  I'm sure we made some mistakes, and we are constantly recalibrating our process.  Our standards are higher now than they were initially, and we have checks and balances now that we didn't have then.  For example, every week we have leads that are looking through a subset of recent curation decisions and recent edits and giving feedback to the editors.  We also meet weekly to discuss common mistakes that we are seeing to prevent them from happening in the future. 
   
   In terms of articles already on sites, we will be going through all of them—even if they haven't been recently edited.  It will take time, but we will be looking at every article on Network Sites eventually.  As of now, we are looking at every article that is edited to make sure that content edited/added is useful to the reader.
   
   The process of having our community involved in editing is complex.  Our systems are not designed for a wiki-type environment, but we are looking into ways that the community can help for the betterment of the Network.  I'm always open to suggestions if you want to email me. 

   replyreport