Hi everyone,
In an effort to maintain the quality of our articles and the integrity of our community we’re doing some cleaning up on eHow. We want to continue to keep eHow a place where members and visitors come to exchange information and learn from one another. This is only possible if we maintain unique quality content. We’ve recently updated our system to detect “clone articles” and “unsuitable articles” in addition to plagiarized articles.
You may be wondering, what is a clone article? Well as you all know, it is unacceptable on eHow to create multiple articles with the same body of content and different titles. In other words, users are prohibited from essentially publishing the same article repeatedly, changing only one or two steps or the title. We consider this SPAM.
Unfortunately, these users are saturating our database with articles that are topical duplicates - -topically the same article with only a few words changed. This not only hurts our community but it also negatively impacts your articles. These articles make the quality of our content unattractive to visitors and it over loads our database and robs serious members of the chance to get quality content noticed.
We would like eHow to continue to be a place where users utilize the library of informative articles and in turn help members get the article views that they want as well as earn money for their quality contributions. This is simply not possible with clone articles.
Our system will also detect and flag unsuitable articles. These articles are usually not informative, do not contain unique content, or do not follow the submission guidelines. When an article is detected by the system as either a clone, unsuitable, or plagiarized article, the member will receive a messaging notifying them that their articles has been flagged and will be deleted. Clone and unsuitable articles will be deleted from the database. Members who receive the plagiarism notice will receive a chance to appeal.
Please submit the appeals form within 48 HOURS of receipt of the plagiarism notice. If you submit your appeal within the 48 hour window your article will remain live on the site until our editorial team reviews your appeal. If you do not appeal within the 48 hour window your article will be suspended from the site until you appeal and the editorial team reviews and renders a decision. If you have any further questions contact us through the contact us page.
We hope that these changes will help keep eHow a rockin’ place and look forward to seeing everyone’s awesome contributions!
Thanks,
The eHow Staff
Tags: clone articles, eHow, plagiarism
Excellent. I believe maintaining high standards on eHow content is in the best interest of the community as a whole.
I’d like to thank the ehow staff for this. As a serious ehow writer, it is greatly appreciated having a place where we can hold our heads high when we declare that we are an ‘ehow writer’. If standards are not high, neither will our reputations be.
While I agree with Janet and Writergig that cleaning up eHow is overdue and warranted, I think that sometimes automated systems are flawed. It is good that alleged plagiarized articles have a chance to appeal, but you are not giving this opportunity to alleged clone articles. I know a few people who wrote articles that appear to be in a “clone form”. eg. How to Buy Cars in (Name of State Here). But they only wrote the one article, not 20. It was completely original. If localized articles are not considered suitable content anymore, it should be clarified in the submission guidelines.
I’m glad that some of the folks are on board with this. If you have only one article on a particular topic, then it wouldn’t be considered a “Clone” article. You would have to have more than one article with similar body of content in order to be considered a “Clone.” But, we are giving users a chance if their other articles do not fall into the “Clone” category– we figure those folks didn’t know better.
Also, there have been an increasing amount of users promoting click fraud and asking other users to promote click fraud and this can lead to a closed account without any warning. Just want to make sure everyone is aware of this.
Thanks,
Rich
Well I agree with all of the writers above. This should be interesting on how it all pans out. Since it is a “system” that will be doing the searching, I’m curious to see what will be considered a “clone” article and one that may not be informative. Of interest to me also is knowing if any of those types of articles would be deleted and then a notice sent or vice versa. I wonder of those articles that are almost identical to older articles written by newer members except for as little as a couple of words, ONE maaaybe TWO steps or the intro different, would/could end up being called clones. I mean I can not imagine any human reading all of the articles on the site to find these. Guess these type of articles that do occasionally show up will go unnoticed. Thanks for continuing to come up with ideas and ways to keep and grow eHow into a well respected and professional site/company.
This new sweeping software is a welcome sight! Thank you eHow bosses for taking such a stand and upholding the integrity of this website. I am so hopeful for eHow’s future. Yeah, we may stumble again, but united we’ll stand. YIPPEE!!!!!!!!!!! In gratitude, Pam Irie (veryirie)
Kudos to eHow for implementing such a system! Cleaning the site and ridding it of such articles will help eHow maintain its reputation of professionalism and quality work.
Jami — I think what they mean by “clone” articles isn’t necessarily judged by the title alone. The system probably takes into account the entire article. (For instance, if all of the “How to Buy a Car in [state]” articles had identical wording, except for the name of the state… that’s probably considered a clone. If, however, the writer writes an entirely different article –with different wording– for each state’s article, that’s probably not considered a clone. I could be wrong, but I’m sure that’s how it’s done….
I’m totally supportive of cleaning up situations such as I’ve seen where one article on making money online for example, will be written ten or more times with only the title changed. I have not knowingly commented or rated positive any such group of articles. However, it seems there is a bunch of articles that are being deleted that DO NOT FALL INTO THIS CATEGORY. And no one is answering the questions about these — except to just repeat the announcement. Why can eHow not understand that their software is NOT always perfect, especially at the beginning, and simply have human beings check into these complaints. It doesn’t help to just plaster the same blurb explaining the reason for this all over the forums and the site, without addressing directly these that are NOT in the clone/unsuitable/plagiarism category, but have somehow been deleted as such.
Also, one member pointed out that he had 50 articles each about how to file for medicaid — one for each of the 50 states. They were all deleted. I didn’t get to see these before they were deleted, but I see his point that there are different procedures and different links for each state, plus people are going to search for Medicaid info in their own state — so I don’t see that as cloning. Like me, I have two articles: How to Teach Your Puppy to Sit, How to Teach Your Kitten to Sit, as well as two each for lying down. So far these have not been deleted. Even tho the titles are similar, and the content is similar, there are subtle differences between teaching a dog and teaching a cat - plus no one who wants help with a cat will look under dogs, and vice versa. So I wouldn’t expect those to be considered cloning — and so far they haven’t. How is the Medicaid series different?
It seems eHow tends to stand up for its software (insisting there is no bug, no problem — this is not the first time I’ve seen this attitude) — at the expense of its writers. eHow often uses a machete when a surgical knife would be much more appropriate.
Unsuitable content: This is the SECOND time I’ve gotten this notice on this same, exact article. No one, including some of the top eHow authors, Rich, and apparently the editorial staff, was able to tell me what was wrong with it the first time, and so they said check spelling and republish. I did. Now today, it has been put into draft again for “unsuitable content”. I STILL have NO IDEA what could POSSIBLY be wrong with this article!!!!!!! Please READ it and enlighten me so that I can “correct” it once and for all:
http://articlesehow.blogspot.com/2009/02/how-to-feed-2-day-old-puppy.html
I have just posted an article, “How to Prepare for the New eHow Clone Detection:
http://www.ehow.com/how_4802292_prepare-new-ehow-clone-detection.html
Please let me know if I have interpreted this guidance and translated it into actions appropriately.
I too believe everyone community needs some level of ‘civilization’ to bring quality to the community. Thank you to the eHow leadership for keeping the eHow reputation and quality top-drawer.
But, of course, that is in the article….
Thank you for your efforts,
Stratus
Thanks Rich for that explanation. How would someone appeal the alleged “clone article?” There was no link in the email. Don’t get me wrong. I am all for this. There just needs to be some checks.
CYN: The author I used as my example wrote ONE article that happened to have the name of a state in it. I believe that’s why it was flagged as a clone article because that is a common factor in those types. They had no other articles even remotely on the same subject. The article was completely original. I really think it was just a mistake, so it should have the option to be appealed.
Good move! I’ve seen lots of filler and clone articles much more frequently due to eHow’s growing popularity. I can understand the desire to make money, but compromising quality to make a buck isn’t the way to go.
Thanks for all of your feedback. Just to clarify clone articles are also reviewed by the editorial team. They have been dedicating a lot of time and effort in helping to maintain the quality of information in our community. We do not take content deletion lightly and our team has been taking the time to review articles flagged as clones before making decisions to take them off of our library.
I sympathize with the eHow staff for trying to clean up the site. As in every change, there are bugs to be worked out–but the integrity of the site has to be protected. Thanks for all you do!
Wow! This is a great idea. Wading through a lot of junk to get good information is going to hurt everyone. Thanks for keeping the site up to date and for keeping the rest of us on our toes!
I am in agreement with you, in cleaning up eHow articles. I will say as a non expierenced writer, I have been tagged. Leason, learned. I hope to continue to write and hope that members who read and rate my articles continue to enjoy them….Mary
As with any organization that has a community of participants who are scattered around the globe, issues about content and quality will be varied and diverse according to culture and value systems in place. The eHow staff may have a standard for evaluating articles but be short-handed to deal with the plethora of “suspect” articles online today.
What if there was a select body of article writers in eHow that conferred together and evaluated suspect articles slated my eHow as SPAM to determine if any appeals might have legitimacy. The “experts” in the particular subjects can be solicited by eHow for the role of the writers’ counsel and put the power of the writing community in the hands of the writers. Then, if the counsel determines that suspect articles have a place, to take the petition to eHow for reconsideration.
Compensation incentives of counsel members to be involved would have to be arranged on a per-review basis.
Thank you for doing this! I’ve seen many poorly written articles on eHow, which makes it hard for professionals to feel proud of his/her association with the site. That said, I think eHow still wins; it is the most appealing (both in format and content) site among its competitors (AC, Helium, etc).
You know what? I am REALLY excited about this idea. I can’t even imagine some other similar sites attempting doing a clean-up like this. It makes me proud to be a part of EHow that they are going to be maintaining quality and staying invested in their writers. Honestly, it sounds to me like most of us who genuinely call ourselves “writers” have nothing to worry about. Because most of us do writer entirely unique articles. I know I personally have been plagiarized, and that scares me a little. So anything they can do to stay up on the situation honestly helps me sleep better at night. In a way, this really encourages me to continue putting a lot of energy and time into EHow, much more so than on any other sites. I was worried when I first heard about this that it would be all willy-nilly, but they are giving good detailed explanations of how they are doing it and why. That’s a mark of integrity in business, allowing everyone to see how a procedure happens and giving people time to protest if they feel they have been lumped in unfairly. I’m all for it!
I started to agree immediately with this process of cleaning up the website from spam articles. Then, Jami Delgado brought up an important point about automated systems and I had to reconsider this action. If the cleanup is being done manually by selected moderators or staff from ehow, I think that this is a great decision. However, if the system is automated then it means we should all be concerned as ehow members because there is no telling what the results are going to be during an automated “sweep”. I am on board with a “cleanup” but would be more comfortable with the Top Ehow Staff or Administrators doing this instead of relying on an automated system.
Okay I know from experience what is wrong AJ I can’t email you now… justgot back from 1 month of excruciating medical emergencycare of family member. Anyway Rich should know and you can check with editor anyone of the articles that are specifically targetting to a grouping such as pets or finance or automotive ETC.
The problem AJ with the article is that while it is excellent it mentions and accepts TUBE feeding (as do most vets who will instruct). Ehow editors have consistently pulled articles about tube feeding puppies in the past due to the risks to puppies. They feel it is dangerous information. It is out there in other avenues but on ehow the editors have taken that stance in the past. I am wlling to bet 99.9% that -that is the reason for article pull. Hope that helps… I was just signing in to check earnings and saw this new thing going on (new to me!).
Alrady
Will we be informed of such action? Or, must be check our articles daily to see if something is missing?
Thanks for any details.
What is click fraud?
We spend a lot of time writing and ready great articles. Whether from pure enjoyment or for specifi information. As for me I am glad to see that we are being given great information. Thanks,
SK
I think is a great move because this is a very serious and respectable site and it should stay like that.
I am very glad that eHow is cleaning up the inappropriate articles because I want to be pround of the company I am associated with and writing for. On the other hand, it is also important if a problem takes place with a writers article, to give them a chance to correct it before deleting. Thanks Rich and Julie, for doing what you do to keep us all on track and credible.
Terry Lynn/Insidestory
Awesome, this was definitely needed. I’ve heard people on Twitter and other blogs say that ehow articles are hit-or-miss when it comes to quality. I always defend the quality of articles here, but this “clean-up” is a great step in the right direction for silencing the nay-sayers.
I remembered reading this and yesterday (the day after I reached my 100th article goal) I had four articles cut. I came back to research this because I was NOT flagged or given an opportunity to appeal. Apparently, nobody else in my eHow group was either because there is a lot of confusion and generally unhappy people. The big question is why are the articles still searchable and the links taking people to editors articles instead of ours.
I’ve loved being part of the eHow family and hate seeing all the rumors and hurt flying around. Can someone please give us some answers. Thanks
I’m upset and confused about this. They said they took down 4 articles. So far the ones I’ve found that they’ve taken down are these:
How To Cook A Roast In A Crock Pot In 1/2 The Time
How to Help A Friend End A Bad Relationship
How To Use Free Directory Assistance
(????) I can’t find the the 4th one.
I have a list of every article I’ve ever published and a list of the links also, and I’ve scoured this list and compared, but cannot find the 4th one. I am so confused!! They sent me a repeat of the above notice saying that they have been “cleaning up” the eHow server and they had to take down 4 of my articles because they violated one of the “following” eHow rules….etc I don’t see how these apply to my stuff. I don’t plagiarize, steal, reapeat articles, or do anything else like the stuff they mentioned. Everything I’ve ever written is from personal experience and is something I can personally attest to. I even write most of my articles in story format, just as they’ve happened to me in real life. How are we supposed to sell an idea or money saving tip without sounding like a commercial. If I’ve found a method or product that works and I’m trying to sound professional and use good grammar it may come off sounding like a commercial. I’ve worked in sales all my life so a lot of the keywords and verbage may sound a little…. well COMMERCIAL! I don’t know what to do about that? This is so demoralizing and defeating. I haven’t been sent an email to appeal. Also, I haven’t found that the process of repeating the already posted information as explanation for why my articles have been removed to be helpful. I’m doing all that I can to follow the rules and I’m STILL being penalized. I just don’t know what to do and I’m very discouraged. Can someone please help me?
I remembered this blog article as well and came back to post again. While the cleanup is GREAT and helpful even, it is clear from forums that people need to know which articles are cut and WHY.
There are so many aspects of the cleanup that people are getting confused and worried. CAN ehow somehow let them know the which and the why of article’s being cut?
As a proponent of good content, I think that this recent “clean up” is somewhat flawed. In your blog post you inform us that we’ll receive a notice stating the problem that may push it to draft or give an appeal process. However, last week’s generous deletion did not seem to follow that whatsoever. I found a plagiarized article on my own after you deleted an article, but was given no recourse to try to appeal. As well, there was no reason at all given for why articles were deleted. I track my articles, so I know what was missing. But, reading this all you did was delete. No one is answering messages. No one has clearly defined what a spam article actually is, only what is could potentially be and the conversation went to free articles.
I know that community morale is down, people are afraid to publish because of the lack of WHY for each deletion and the outright threat of account closure if anyone even attempts to publish something similar to anything deleted. Rich said these were scrupulously reviewed, yet you can’t provide more than a generic post deletion email? It just seems unprofessional on many levels.
I would prefer that other site problems were fixed before another undertaking. This seems like one more hit to the write and has driven people away. It’s confusing and disappointing.
I have just started on ehow and think it is only fair to the members to not allow this fraud and appreciate all that is being done to protect the honest members, way to go!
I agree whole heartly. I know they have checked me for articles, and since these articles were from me in ezine.com I and to let them know. this is definitely preventing plagiarized articles. I love the fact that they are watching out for us.
I applaud the necessity for quality material and workmanship, but I do feel that a notification process should be in place. Anything less creates the appearance of possible collusion with popular writers, smacks of favoritism, and hints at a possible breach of ethics. How do we know that you do not have personal relationships with some of the writers, who submit for personal gain? As long as money is involved, it needs to be squeaky clean, and clearly defined. The people who submit articles should be dealt with as professionally as possible. You need to notify people that articles (for which they have collected payment in the past) are due to be removed, and you should provide the reason. What guarantees are in place that articles, that are removed, are not reformatted rewritten, and then republished by someone else for personal gain? Especially if they are permitted to remain published… Please be respectful of your writers.