I am not happy about what editors do to my article.

1. 94

   Eric Cauncaposted 3 years ago

   I don't like and I am not happy about the way how editors edited my articles when I submitted it to the owlocation.
   
   They added irritating photos from Wikimedia which are blurred, and focus only on the head of the fishes instead of the whole body. They also get photos from different websites, I thought HubPages doesn't allow it. They put photos from Pixabay and Wikimedia, my photos are from Instagram. He also put text on the First photos. I thought watermarks are forbidden.
   
   They also cut the first paragraph and put it at the end of the article and entitled it "My Experience about the Fishes/Article". If they told me that they will put it in the end, I would intend to delete it. It just an intro, and become useless when they put it in the end.
   
   He also spelled Wikipedia as Wikimedia.
   
   The article also doesn't appear on google search. Instead, I saw the Hubpages version, not the owlocation version.
   
   https://owlcation.com/stem/
   
   12-Most-Beautiful-Fish-in-the-Philippines

   replyreport
   1. 82

      samanthacubbisonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Wikimedia is correct—it's where you find free-use photos.
      
      As I understand it, you are not allowed to use Instragram photos unless you have that user's permission written down.
      
      We format our articles with personal experience towards the end of the article, as the reader is there for the most beautiful fish, not your bio.
      
      Text overlay is not forbidden. We actually encourage it. Watermarks, as Brandon said, are used on photos for companies to prevent theft.

      replyreport
      1. 94

         Eric Cauncaposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         Deleted
         1. 82

            samanthacubbisonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            You need to ask the poster for permission to use Instragram photos. And like CYong74 said, "Even if you have permission from the account owners, you have no idea whether they are telling the truth and whether they even own the pictures. They could have stolen the images themselves." This can be a liability.
            
            You can change the source yourself if it's incorrect.

            replyreport
2. 89

   lobobrandonposted 3 years ago

   1. It takes time after a move for Google to register the new website address. It will first show as hubpages on Google, then Owlcation but still link to the Hubpages article before finally changing to Owlcation.
   2. Wikimedia is the opensource platform that Wikipedia uses for images. So using Wikimedia is correct.
   3. You say you used images from Instagram. Did you get permission to do this? Wikimedia and Pixabay are opensource and free to use and "edit"
   4. Since you can edit them you are free to add text to them. Many people do this to help increase Pinterest traffic.
   5. What they did with the images is fine. A watermark is when a company selling images puts their brand name over it to prevent theft. Adding text does not necessarily make it a watermark.
   6. About the paragraph swap and change, that's up to you to change, edit or delete.
   
   I just wanted to clarify some of the image-related issues that you brought up.

   replyreport
3. 94

   CYong74posted 3 years ago

   Eric, I believe many hubbers have advised you against using Instagram images. Even if you have permission from the account owners, you have no idea whether they are telling the truth and whether they even own the pictures. They could have stolen the images themselves.
   
   Using Pixabay and Wikimedia images, poor quality as those might be, is the safe and proper practice.

   replyreport
4. 94

   Eric Cauncaposted 3 years ago

   Yes, I think they own the photos because they have websites and they own the websites too. When I viewed it, the owner of the Instagram account is there and with the photos. According to the sites, they are itchylogists and divers. There are also similar photos but captured with different angles. To those who have no sites, they send me the original, uncropped and unedited photos through email.

   replyreport
   1. 92

      Sherry Hewinsposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I have used photos from other people's websites. I contacted the person to confirm that it was their own photo, and that I had permission to use it, generally they will want a link back to their site. I save the email granting permission in case I should ever need it. I also attribute the photo to them, and mention that I have their permission. I would only bother to do this if I could not find a good free to use photo.
      
      If you don't like the photos the editors have chosen, try to find one that you do like that is legal to use. I have done this before and have not had a problem with it.

      replyreport
   2. 0

      Marisa Writesposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      What do you put in the "source" section for those images?  You need to say who the photo is from, e.g. "Photo by ......, reproduced with permission." 
      
      Note that you don't have to link to the original photo, and actually it's often better not to.  It will be a greater benefit to the photographer if you link to the photographer's website - and you will have less trouble with the editors here if you do that.

      replyreport
5. 94

   CYong74posted 3 years ago

   Eric, the editors wouldnt know all these. And anyway the rules are straightforward. Keep to them instead of trying to find exceptions.
   
   Note too, you didnt sign a perpetual legal agreement with them. What if they revoke their permission tomorrow? Are you going to remove your hub right away?
   
   That's but one of the reasons why not to use such images. And why the editor replaced them.

   replyreport
   1. 89

      lobobrandonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Editors will never remove photos unless they are irrelevant and low quality or have watermarks. They do not really care if you steal images for your hubs. HP does not care where you get your pics, but they do suggest that you use images you are legally allowed to. I think liability goes to the hubber in such cases.

      replyreport
      1. 94

         CYong74posted 3 years agoin reply to this

         The liability will of course fall on the hubber, because the guidelines are clear. You should refrain but if you insist on doing it, then you bear the consequences when anything happens.
         
         Anyway, I think it's silly to use already published images for a writeup that is dependent on visuals. You reduce the chances of ranking.

         replyreport
      2. 82

         samanthacubbisonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         Editors will for sure remove photos if they are doing a basic/premium edit and they seem "fishy." (No pun intended.)

         replyreport
         1. 89

            lobobrandonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

            Haha, good one.

            replyreport
            1. 93

               JerryFisherposted 3 years agoin reply to this

               Brandon, I'm considering making websites around some of my articles to try and regain Google ranking lost on this transition. You seem to have a lot of knowledge on this. Question is, can I leave my articles on this Maven site and operate them both independently ( websites with same articles and same articles on Maven), or, once websites are up, remove them from here? Would Google see me as the original author on the website articles? I understand that Google penalising duplicate content is a myth. Appreciate your advice.

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  Marisa Writesposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                  I'm not sure what you're asking. If your websites are not "live", then Google won't know about any articles you have on them.  On the day you're ready to launch your website, delete the articles from here.  You're done.
                  
                  My advice - choose your two most successful niches and build websites around those.  Leave the rest of the articles on Maven.
                  
                  I used to run multiple websites but the landscape has changed today.  If you want your new websites to build traffic, you will need to add a new article at least once a week on a continuous basis, and create (and post regularly on) complementary social network pages.  You'll need to devote hours of work every week for each website - so ask yourself how many hours you're willing to devote.
                  
                  Running a website used to be passive income but it isn't really any more!

                  replyreport
                  1. 93

                     JerryFisherposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                     Yeah thanks Marisa. I read somewhere that you can have the same articles on Google because somehow they can detect that you are the author of both and therefore won't punish you for duplicate content. So my question revolves around this, that could you build a website around your lead article and leave it also on Maven without a Google slap - possibly on both? Yes I've had many sites of my own in the past too when the net was a lot thinner, so I bet it's a lot of work with links etc these days. Just so frustrating here doing exactly that - writing fresh content for my lead articles maybe once every three weeks and then see it all crash through no fault of my own, like us all, overnight. I just don't want to start doing that all over again here and then have them pull another rabbit out of the hat.

                     replyreport
                     1. 89

                        lobobrandonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                        Sorry for the late reply. You could send me a message via the contact button if needed. Yes, you can have copies of your articles here on HP/Maven on your website. All you need to do is add some HTML telling Google that the original is here and your website would not be penalized. If you choose to delete your articles from here you could then go ahead and delete this line of code which is basically a rel canonical tag.
                        
                        I did some googling to find out if there is any other way and I found this post from Neil patel, see point number 4 https://neilpatel.com/blog/the-step-by- … -your-seo/ apparently this is pretty common.

                        replyreport
                        1. 93

                           JerryFisherposted 3 years agoin reply to this

                           Thanks a lot for that Brandon for your research into this. Patel's right up there. Might just wait a week or so in case the rankings rise from the ashes again, but great to know there's not a penalty if done correctly and you can still leave your articles right here anyway. Cheers!

                           replyreport
6. 94

   Eric Cauncaposted 3 years ago

   1. The editor did not replace the photos, they added photos.
   2. I have the conversation and the email of the owner's photo and they said they are happy to use their photos by me. They know everything the websites where it would be posted (Hubpages), the title, the content, everything.
   3. My very first article did not pass the QAP due to the quality of the photo. The editor said "USE INSTAGRAM" though.

   replyreport
7. 94

   CYong74posted 3 years ago

   Well, if you are that certain these communications will protect, it's your choice. It's your content after all. If a DMCA comes in, it's your account that would be penalized.

   replyreport
8. 94

   Eric Cauncaposted 3 years ago

   If I used photos from Instagram. Editors must be blamed because they told me to do it.

   replyreport
   1. 82

      samanthacubbisonposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I only see one author edit request and it doesn't say anything about Instagram photos. Do you have that message handy? Regardless, it is your content and therefore your responsibility to make legal/fair choices.

      replyreport
9. 95

   theraggededgeposted 3 years ago

   Now Samantha has seen those messages & photos, it might be a good idea to delete them from the forum because they can turn up on a search result. This forum is not closed - anyone can see it.

   replyreport
   1. 94

      Eric Cauncaposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      Thank you.

      replyreport
10. 95

    theraggededgeposted 3 years ago

    Eric, you are displaying lots of names and email addresses. I really think you should delete them. You've got proof if anyone decides to send in a DMCA.

    replyreport
    1. 94

       Eric Cauncaposted 3 years agoin reply to this

       Thanks for your advice.

       replyreport
11. 0

    Marisa Writesposted 3 years ago

    Note that you don't have to accept what the editors have done. You can change it back if you don't like it.  There is a small risk that the article will be moved back to HubPages, but that doesn't happen very often.

    replyreport
    1. 94

       Eric Cauncaposted 3 years agoin reply to this

       Thank you.

       replyreport
12. 94

    Eric Cauncaposted 3 years ago

    Hi, how to determine the license type of a photo at Pixabay. I'll change the photos.

    replyreport
    1. 95

       theraggededgeposted 3 years agoin reply to this

       All Pixabay photos are suitable for commercial use. Even though they require no attribution, it's always a good idea to mention the image originator.
       
       Of course if you want an istock image, which they also display, you'd have to pay for them.
       
       

       replyreport
13. 94

    Eric Cauncaposted 3 years ago

    Thank you theraggededge. Thank you everyone for advising me. I love you all.

    replyreport
    1. 70

       Miebakagh57posted 3 years agoin reply to this

       Eric, you're welcome.

       replyreport
14. 94

    Eric Cauncaposted 3 years ago

    Hi, does Wikimedia require attribution? And also, can I crop photos from Pixabay and Wikimedia? Thank you.

    replyreport
    1. 95

       theraggededgeposted 3 years agoin reply to this

       You have to check each one on Wikimedia. Just click the image and the info and license should appear.
       
       You can crop/edit images from Pixabay. Again, you'd have to check the license on Wikimedia.
       
       
       

       replyreport
       1. 95

          theraggededgeposted 3 years agoin reply to this

          https://creativecommons.org/licenses/

          replyreport