Some people have asked why do some Hubs go directly to featured. We are working on ways to get more Hubs featured as quickly as we can and are testing mechanisms for doing it. Right now, there are a small number of Hubbers where our system can process their Hubs immediately based on data we have. We don't have this data for every Hubber yet. We are working on expanding it.
My hope is we can significantly reduce the 24 hour period for all good Hubs. The team is working really hard at improving our quality system. Over the next few months I expect we'll make significant progress on getting more good stuff through quickly while reducing spam and lower quality content.
We often test new technologies for a period of time to see if they're worth expanding. The feedback we've heard is it's important to reduce the pending period. We are analyzing how this test is running in conjunction with our other efforts and hope we can get more Hubs featured more quickly.
Can I suggest that you speed up this process
We don't have this (these) data for every Hubber yet. We are working on expanding it.
Many experienced writers who have many, many hubs (100s) published are leaving or have stopped writing new hubs because of this. Surely the risk of losing good writers and quality hubs outweighs the low risk that they will write poor quality stuff. You already have test for duplication etc. I think experienced writers deserve more respect through a 'trusted writer' scheme => months is far too long to wait - you have hubber scores, you have numbers of hubs published surely that's enough.
The real pain for me and may others is not the 24 hours delay to be featured, but the 5 to 14 days it causes for the page to be indexed. The G bot finds the "NOINDEX" tag, within 30 minutes, and goes away for days or week before coming back. If you could stop this the delay would be less of a pain. Having to submit a request to Google webmasters to get the pay indexed is a real pain. Does HP have an answer to this?
In my personal opinion, I would prefer a new article NOT to be PUBLISHED on the site - hidden away from bots and friends until it gets through PENDING. Put them on another URL. This would mean that the bots would not see them. Once featured and published the bot would index them within 30 minutes. If there is something wrong deal with it during this period. Speeding up the pending would then have real benefits. Currently speeding up pending from 24 to 12 hours would have no impact on the delays to be indexed penalty - IMO
This sounds good to me. Whatever it takes to prevent pending hubs from being visited then shunned by Google for days if not weeks.
Not to me.
That 24 hour delay kills hubs that are written around breaking news stories.
True... it basically killed Dale Hyde's hub on Hurricane Sandy. There has to be a way to allow trusted authors publish immediately.
You are right. Example: The DNC was held in Charlotte near me. Some of the policemen were dancing as they directed traffic. It was so cool. Those photos and video would have made great Hubs and drawn visitors to HubPages. But why would I put them on here to be lost for 24 plus hours when Yahoo would have them up in minutes?
When I was new here I created a hub around a news story to try and see how many hits I could get in a short period of time. Within a 1-3 day period this hub received over 10,000 hits. This 24 hour waiting period totally kills any such type hubs.
With a sizable Google+, Facebook and Twitter following I'd love to do such things again but why bother doing it on HubPages when this pending status makes it practically impossible?
Just to be clear, any pending or Idle Hub can be promoted on facebook, twitter, pinterest and others and receive traffic.
Yes, but the point is that we don't want to do that, because if it's on those sites, Google's robots may follow the link too - and our experience shows that once they see that "no index" tag, they run away and may not come back again for weeks. Killing any possibility of getting good Google traffic while the topic is still "hot".
I also delay posting to social media until after 'pending' to avoid the indexing delay penalty.
Also it appears that while posting a NOINDEX tag is recommended to stop a page from being crawled when its first created as a permanent thing, getting the bot to respond to changes is problematic. As you have stated G takes ages to de-index idled hubs. Our experience is that it takes ages for G to re-index a page that has the NOINDEX tag during pending. So why go that way. Keep the pages UNPUBLISHED while in pending, so they never get the NOINDEX tag and speed up the review process by allowing 'Trusted authors' to fast track through pending. IMO
If the reason why this was done was not to lose income while in pending then perhaps the losses through delayed indexing (several days), and the decision people make to not post until through pending, may affect this. IMO
The other thing that happens if you post a pending hub to social pages is that they get indexed there first. The social page links get listed above the page link in the SERPS, when the hub eventually gets indexed. People are less likely to click the social page link => loss of traffic, until the hub ranking lifts.
They may receive traffic but have no earning potential!
My hubs are featured and it has take nearly two years to get here. I like being featured but being featured alone dose not drive traffic. We still need to publish original content and build relationships for us to go far so lets get on with this.
DId you mean "The real pain for me and many others ..."?
Thank you, Paul, for responding to a question I wanted answered.
It would be good if you could let us know if and when instant featuring is granted. Until then, I am unhappy about publishing any new hubs because that pending period is the death knell for many hubs.
I can understand, given the quality issues that have plagued HP in recent times, why some hubbers may be given priority for indexing. But, in all fairness, it does appear that only the apprentices, correct me if I'm wrong, benefit from super fast indexing and do not have to worry about the pending status. I'm not for one minute suggesting that they shouldn't, but surely it would make more sense to subject hubs from hubbers who have had hubs unpublished, or have violated the regulations, or are new to HP, to subject those users to the pending status, not hubbers who do not fall into those categories.
I've just graduated from the apprenticeship program and my new hubs have always been put into the pending status for twenty four hours ever since the system was introduced. I can't speak for all apprentices, but for me being an apprentice hasn't shortened the pending period.
Not true for this apprentice! My hubs always go into pending for 24 hours.
some do, some don't
some non 'a's get fast tracked, some very new, some older = total mystery
it is not a mystery. Paul just stated they are testing a feature to get this moving along.
"Right now, there are a small number of Hubbers where our system can process their Hubs immediately based on data we have. We don't have this data for every Hubber yet. We are working on expanding it."
Mine too. Reading this info here though I'm really upset I've been posting to FB before waiting the 24 hours through.
Me too, I wish I'd known. I'm going to tell my circle of football hubbers to read this topic so they know too.
From now on I will wait until it is out of pending before posting to Twitter and other sites. The problem is that HP users who see the hub while it is still in pending can post it to social media sites which will have the same effect.
This will hurt the experienced, well-connected, and quality authors who get their work shared. Hubpages is pushing away it's best authors.
They need to sort this out fast. I understand the need for the pending phase, but it needs to be limited to new authors. Once you've written 10 hubs and have been on the site more than 30 days, the pending period should be removed. By all means continue to do your checks, but the author should be given "the benefit of the doubt" until those checks are done, and their work should be published right away.
At the moment. the pending phase shows a distrust of experienced authors that is on a par with new authors writing their first hub (who could be any shameless advertiser or spammer). People who have been writing quality content for many months/years don't deserve to jump through the same hoops.
I'm also wondering if Google is finding our new hubs regardless, if we've set up Google authorship.
Of the new hubs I've made since Pending status was introduced, I promoted one during the Pending period, and know that Google crawled it while it was noindexed because I found Google had indexed the Tweet pointing to it. It took over three weeks before Google indexed it.
For the other new hubs I've made since then, I've been careful not to promote them in any way until the pending period was over, submitted one manually to WMT and left the other alone. They still took two to three weeks before Google had a cache of them.
Prior to Pending hubs being implemented, I used to start getting search traffic on my new hubs within an hour or so of publishing them.
This is a real shame. HP was the one site I've found that really worked well for leveraging topical and current events that get a surge of traffic, then taper off to modest traffic. I've been publishing new content on Wizzley instead, since it operates on the same model, but of course it doesn't earn as much. I keep hoping HP will abandon this SEO experiment. At first, I honestly thought it was a bug.
I still don't understand why HP decided to try this experiment. What is the rationale for noindexing new content? What is the advantage? What precedents were there -- are there really any other websites that do this? There's nothing I can find in any SEO guidelines from Google, Matt Cutts, Danny Sullivan, or anyone else suggesting that this is a good idea. Considering that Google has put in several "fresh content" tweaks to its algorithm in the last year to favor fresh content, it would seem to put us at a disadvantage.
"For the other new hubs I've made since then, I've been careful not to promote them in any way until the pending period was over"
I follow this and don't submit to social media, G+ or Pinterest until out of pending - I also don't interlink until 'featured'. I submit ALL manually to WMT including sleepy ones that I edited substantially (e.g. title change).
Turning off the ads is only 50% successful as most get crawled while pending.
My gut feeling is that the 'NOINDEX' was meant to be a once only thing - not something that you change and this is partially why it is causing problems ( HP have reported delays with Idle hubs being de-indexed ).
I personally think it would be better to leave new hubs 'unpublished' until through pending (reduce the time for established authors). This would mean the NOINDEX tag only applied to hubs that don't qualify to be featured - not this limbo status - bad until proven innocent.
GG - with the large number of writers here on HP who joined the site but were never screened (and the policy still involves no screening process), I'm guessing there are few ways to spot bad content without implementing the idling phase for all new content (from all Hubbers). That way, someone who's been around for a while but writes poor-quality hubs gets their work filtered a bit before it's indexed, and they (HP) can keep it from being 'featured.'
Otherwise, even if HP screens new writers (which it doesn't), longtime Hubbers who produce bad content will continue to get published right away. However, as everyone has said, this penalizes longtime writers who produce good content.
This still doesn't clean up the lingering inventory of what may have been bad hubs all along, it just helps intervene & screen new content.
Since so many people have stated they'd like to keep publishing here 'except for' the noindex thing, it would help tremendously to quickly find a way to pre-approve the stable of skilled and trusted writers here.
I can see why this is critical for Hubbers who are writing on news items, which have to be able to take advantage of the current headlines.
But there's a much simpler solution for everyone else: leave the Hub unpublished until it's through the Pending stage.
The small number of accounts for which you have data are apprentice and staff accounts. How lovely. Why don't you prioritize collecting data on accounts based on how long they've been active and how many hubs they currently have?
JAnderson99's account has been active for at least two years and has 665 hubs on it. How do you not have enough data from his account, yet have enough data from an "a" account that is only a few months old with less than 100 hubs? One would think that a longer and more fruitful publishing history would yield more data. Please explain this to my small feeble brain.
Thanks for all you do. I know it's your goal to have this be one of the best sites ever and we can tell you're always hard at work making improvements. I'm so thankful!
An HP blog post from year 2009: "When Will HubPages Break Into The Quantcast Top 100 US Websites?" http://blog.hubpages.com/2009/10/hubpag … quantcast/
Well, guess what? Despite the Panda, Penguin, and all the other invasions; HP did it. As of this post, November 1, 2012, HP is 84. I, for one, would love to have a website listed as number 84 on Quantcast. Just saying...
And here are some names that HP is outranking...
85 msnbc.com 11,238,421
86 comcast.com 11,137,738
87 bizrate.com 11,127,046
88 nydailynews.com 11,108,214
89 wunderground.com 11,056,987
90 livestrong.com 10,991,316
91 celebuzz.com 10,970,283
92 cnet.com 10,885,492
93 hp.com 10,881,406
94 ups.com 10,796,301
95 deviantart.com 10,752,879
96 4shared.com 10,600,581
97 Hidden profile — — —
98 rss2search.com 10,447,940
99 barackobama.com 10,422,885
100 city-data.com 10,404,569
Don't get excited about that!
It was 78 last week, it is falling.
I remember when HP broke into the top 50, but that was a long time ago
I don't think u can consider conquast data on its own without looking at the number of pages indexed, and the number of writers. There are many more hubs than in 2009, therefore the site gets a lot of traffic, but an average page might get less traffic than a page on a smaller site that is further up the quantcast list.
No it's not. Read the whole thread and you will see that HP did much better in the past.
Please let me know when any new hubs I write will skip the pending phase. Then I'll consider publishing new material here again. Thank you.
Hate to say it but I kind of know how you feel...
One thing we could do that may slow down the initial crawl is to remove ads until it's through the review. Google search and AdSense share some crawling resources. We think ads likely triggers the initial crawl.
For new Hubs, we are seeing most get indexed pretty quickly. There are outliers, but it doesn't seem to be a significant issue.
My last 2 hubs were indexed within 24 hours of after being pending. And one of those hubs is actually getting single-digit, daily Google traffic right away now, instead of the usual 6-month wait. A first for me.
"remove ads until it's through the review"
That would be great.
Average indexing delays for me were 4 days, many took 14 days (including exclusives). Submitting to webmasters speeded up the indexing to 1-2 days, but many were longer. I don't know what the current delays without this extra step would be. Lots of people are complaining about the delays so to them it is significant. If you have data on indexing, why not replace the 'last time bot crawled' with 'page indexed by G bot and B bot on [date]'
Why not simply leave them UNPUBLISHED-Pending. Let the hubber know that the page is pending. Not sure why you want these pages sent to followers etc. while they still in limbo - there would appear to be no loss of impressions etc. if they were delayed until out of pending. They would be indexed within 30 minutes and featured everywhere once 'featured'. Improvements in time taken to get through pending would then be beneficial.
I think I would prefer to leave them unpublished as well instead of taking off the ads. Otherwise, we will miss out on the impressions revenue from other Hubbers - which is very important especially for new writers and for writers who haven't learned SEO yet.
Do you think it would matter in the rankings if Google finds a hub for the first time and sees that it has had a lot of views already? If that is the case, I would be willing to change my mind.
Paul I am very glad to see you are working on this. Thank you.
I have had a few hubs take 3 weeks or more to be indexed, so to me it does seem to be a significant issue! My hub that was hub of the day a few weeks ago, on why airlines don't allow cell phones on airplanes, is still not indexed 20 days after publication, even though I have manually submitted it through Webmaster. A search using its url shows that it's been shared in many places, yet it's not showing up in Google, Bing or Yahoo searches.
(Yet one I wrote 2 days ago has indexed.)
Does editing while in pending have any effect on how long a hub takes to be indexed? (I know it resets the pending phase, but I've wondered if it has other effects too.)
I would welcome anything that gets hubs indexed more rapidly and that reduces the poor quality hubs.
One thing I have noticed about the pending feature is that we are simply not seeing the huge level of crap hubs in the feed that we used to see. All the hubs I have seen seem to be of quality.
So I guess it is working.
Pity it's put so many of us off publishing at all.
Edit: I didn't look far enough back!! There is a load of crap on there still!
So this is crap that went through the pending and passed? What is the point of pending new hubs then?
Did you see this one?
This is QUALITY, according to HP!
This one probably just 'slipped through the net'.
Either that or it was graded by ESL people over on that site HP are subcontracting the hub hopping to.
I just pulled up the latest hubs - thanks for the link - and there are hubs there that are 1-2 hours old. These are not hubs that have passed the pending period. They are still under review.
No they're not. Those hubs less than 24 hours old come from the small elite band of hubbers whose hubs DO NOT GO INTO PENDING.
If you go to view source and search for "NOINDEX" - none will be found. If you look at the date last updated (at the end of the article) you will see today's date (less than 24 hours). Paul E has admitted that some authors bypass pending.
Whatever's clever for me, I'll keep crunching out the best hubs I can, regardless of what happens. I will fight through the storms on the ground too, because lord knows nothing is going to stop us now, after we survived Panda, and this super storm Sandy combined, up here on the east coast.
It's full systems ago, and full steam ahead!
Ahoy captain! and Thank god for Hubpages, thanks Paul for the heads up.
This explains why all of my new hubs get 0 hits a day solid, just days after the initial page views generated from; Hubpage followers and shares on Social Networking sites.
Once this phase is over, the Hub gets 0 traffic, i was just coming to the same conclusion that they weren't getting Google Indexed but what i've heard from here, i'm shocked and annoyed that this has been wasting a lot of my time and probably done more damage than good, to our earnings and page views.
This is a big problem, it needs a fast resolution, some experienced Hubbers on here have put forwards some good ideas, i just hope they get listened to, No ads for the pending phase and beyond absolutely kills 50% of my Sports Hubs, that are often only red hot for the first few days.
And to ad insult to injury, today was the lowest visit totals since I joined the site..............
Seems like every time my traffic starts to recover HP makes yet another change and back down it goes. I'm down to about 20% of what my traffic was at it's peak. 236 daily views today compared to 1,100 daily views peak. For a long time I was averaging around 600 per day. Those days seem long gone now.
My hub views have been shrinking drastically. The last few days I was not even close to 200 views and I remember the days when it was 900 to 1,000 or so views a day. The money earned is also shrinking drastically. What in the world is going on? I have put so much time and effort into writing these hubs. It is more than discouraging! Wish I knew what to do to help turn this around.
My published hub count is down from 119 to 99 as of five minutes ago. HP continues to idle my material, most of it Pagan related. These hubs, now called what they are, articles, have been moved to my WordPress blog. Most of you have following my doings involving this.
In reference to this post, it was written 3 weeks ago. I have not seen any changes as alluded to. At this rate, by the time that change takes place I will probably no longer be on the site as all my material here will have become idled, lol.
Good luck to all who stick this one out. May HP be like the Phoenix!
I am slowly withdrawing from the forum as well. I simply see nothing positive happening. With my remaining hubs, I still get some income, but it seems like there is a percentage quota that HP has to idle...so I figure by year's end, I will be down to possibly 50 hubs here and by Valentine's Day of 2013 I think there will be two hubs left on my sub-domain. They are doing exceptionally well...however, that does not mean too much, as one of my hubs with great views, high hub score and number one keyword rating in Google was idled approximately two weeks ago....so one simply never knows. It is always a surprise when you log in, haha!
We are still working on tweaking some things to see if we can improve crawling of new featured Hubs. We made some changes to our sitemaps that appears to have helped last week. We are also working on reducing the pending period pretty significantly.
In general, Hubs that become featured are doing extremely well right now in terms of their initial rankings. We track the performance of Hubs by time in cohorts, so it take a bit to see how Hub published this month do, but they're off to a good start.
Congratulations to the HP team on the traffic surge
- wonderful to see reward for effort (touch wood)
- hope it lasts.
Yes, my traffic is up too. Good going! (I bet it will be even better when the pending period is reduced )
I am at less than half of the views I had a few weeks ago. This, plus the fact that any changes to my hubs will be judged by Mechanical Turk peons, who have so few job skills/education that they are willing to work for a pittance, has killed any desire to update/correct my hubs. Fortunately, my own sites and Squidoo lenses are doing much better, so I am spending whatever time I have on improving these instead.
Thank you for working on reducing the pending period. I'd love to see it go away for writers who have a proven track record.
Thanks, my traffic has surged in the last couple of weeks, and is roughly double what it was a month ago. Keep doing what you're doing!
If reducing the pending period threatens this traffic surge, don't bother.
Paul, I know you're working hard and all, but seriously, don't put Hubs live until they are through the QAP. No sense comes out of it, apart from lower-ranking on search engines, or not even being ranked for weeks, sometimes not ever.
I think there is a misconception around the QAP, going live with a no index tag, and showing up in Google's search results.
Our data is showing that 98+% of sampled Hubs are ranking a few days after getting featured. We do see some Hubs that get crawled while they are pending, but this has been declining and it doesn't appear to prevent Hubs from doing well.
We set up some more reports to monitor the crawling and seeing what we can do to influence it. If we see something that's significant, we'll share it.
If it's a misconception, then staff need to be more active in correcting it because it is widespread.
Many people like myself, are actively submiting to webmasters after coming out of pending to overcome the delays, which for me have lasted for three weeks with one hub. Its a pain to have to do this every time. I don't understand why you don't leave a hub unpublished until its been through QAP. That way it never has a NOINDEX tag if its featured. Why tempt fate, especially when you have stated that the pending period will be reduced.
Do you have any stats on the percentage of hubs that get crawled during pending? Most of mine get crawled.
Hubs are made Guilty of having poor quality until proven innocent.
The switch can't be doing our reputation with G much good. Effectively the bot has to visit at least twice before the page gets indexed. Also there are some obvious risks in having a page published on HP before it is vetted and indexed - IMO
Huge increase in hubs published in less than 24 hours noted. Is this due to:
=> more bypassing pending?
=> reduction in time taken to get through pending?
My last hub, published about 3 days ago, did go through pending, but it came out of it much faster than I expected. It still took a few hours but definitely less than 24. So going by my experience, and it is just my experience, I would say that the time taken to get through pending is reduced.
I think the team does a great job and I'm sure you will make the necessary adjustments. You can understand, from the comments you've received, that it is difficult to have to wait the 24 hours. Thanks for all you do!
I am wondering what "data" you need to have. Because it seems of you have enough the hub is not "processed" at all. I am sure we would all like to provide whatever data you need to achieve that.
We are getting almost all Hubs through QAP in about half the time it was taking.
Look for more reductions to come.
Well, great! My new poem is still in the "pending" queue, and I just saw it was Google-crawled "5 hours ago."
Thanks a lot, HP--now Google won't be back, and I can't get it out of the penalty box! From what I've read, sharing it around to get traffic from social media sites does nothing for Google ranking or crawling.
I HATE THIS!!!
Please come up with a better method that doesn't penalize people right out of the gate...as has been suggested multiple times before, especially for authors in good standing with a long history here!
You are basically telling Google bots to ignore everyone's writing here, if they see that 'no-index' tag, and leave and don't come back...WTH??!! Way to promote your site, HP! Not!
Well I see in my absence nothing new has happened since the start of this thread. I do know that out of 121 hubs I had published here at one time, I am now down to 95. All were idled....then I simply unpublished them and have moved all but the last recent four.
My views surged for a couple of days, but has went into a slump again.
Until I see some positive changes and the pending done away with, I will continue to not publish new material here. Not a threat or me trying to be "bad", just a fact. My time is considered by myself and believe it or not, others who depend on me for information, as being valuable. I share that information by publishing...just not here currently.
I will pop back in from time to time to see if and when things trend in a more positive fashion.
For those who do not have to wait on the pending, kudos and good luck! No hard feelings towards any of you because you don't control that. I think that is super that at least some are not being penalized.
My latest hub has been in pending for 29 hours and counting...
I thought this was supposed to have been reduced. Are there reasons why the pending period may take longer for some hubs? I did mention the name Muhammad! heheh... not in any kind of insulting way though.
I have noticed it takes longer for some hubs to be published. It is really strange. I have just spent a lot of time writing a new hub and thirty hours later in has not been published. Why?
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.