jump to last post 1-8 of 8 discussions (32 posts)

QAP hits older hubs?

  1. wilderness profile image97
    wildernessposted 4 years ago

    Looks like the QAP is indeed going after older hubs, just as Paul said.  Let me put this in perspective a little though - in 3 years I have seen a hub get a 100 score maybe 3 or 4 times.  And never for more than a day or so.

    Now - happy day!  big_smile - I have 3 of them!  Three hubs, all at 100!  And 2 more at 99 - that's almost as rare as 100!









    All three of them have blue arrows.  How's that for ironic? sad

    1. WryLilt profile image87
      WryLiltposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Good job! I should go delete some more old crap hubs. Nah too lazy, they can get QAPped.

      1. wilderness profile image97
        wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        So do I delete the crap hubs with blue arrows or promote the ones at 100? I'd be promoting a deleted hub! lol

        1. lobobrandon profile image83
          lobobrandonposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Hahaha!! I see my first 100 ever. It does get decent traffic though smile

          1. wilderness profile image97
            wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Oh no!  Now one of the 100's has dropped to 99 - the one with the most ever, monthly, weekly and daily traffic!

            Wonder if I should delete all the high traffic hubs? big_smile

            1. janderson99 profile image85
              janderson99posted 4 years ago in reply to this

              maybe the QAP hit the fan

    2. GA Anderson profile image86
      GA Andersonposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      OK, I'm confused. Are you saying your 100 and 99 score hubs got QAPd?
      What's the ironic part of the Blue Arrows part? They were getting more traffic after QAP?

      GA

      1. wilderness profile image97
        wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        No - just that the only 100's I've seen in months are all blue arrows.  Guess I'm just a little strange.

  2. Judi Bee profile image88
    Judi Beeposted 4 years ago

    I really don't get how it works.  I have a hub that's over 1,300 words, has 3 photos (properly attributed, of course!), a map, a quiz and a video, I've set it out as usual (sidebars etc) yet it scores lowest of my hubs now - 68 - much less than some shorter hubs.  I guess Hub score is as big a mystery as Hubber score.

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I don't either, Judi - I just found it funny that they all had blue arrows.  Warped sense of humor, I guess.

    2. TIMETRAVELER2 profile image92
      TIMETRAVELER2posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      It isn't just about following formats, etc...the writing has to be good and the topic fresh and well covered.

      1. Will Apse profile image91
        Will Apseposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I don't look at hubscores at all, normally. But now you have forced me to, I am obliged to notice fresh faces at the top of the accounts page.

        I also noticed one of my old, out of date pages got QAPed on quality grounds. Poor little thing, harmless and barely clinging to life before, and now stamped on by a Hunnish mTurk. Sigh...

      2. Judi Bee profile image88
        Judi Beeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        I realise that it isn't just about the format.  However, my style of writing doesn't deviate greatly between my history hubs and this topic is covered no less comprehensively than I have covered other topics.  I'm entirely willing to accept that all my writing is crap and that I don't do justice to any of my topics - in which case all my hubs should be languishing in the 60s because this one is on a par with them. 

        I'm not whining that my hub has been "criticised" (WIlderness and the late, great SimeyC were in my AP group and I got used to them and others offering critiques of my hubs - this one included).  I'm commenting that it doesn't make sense to me that this hub should fair badly in the QAP when nearly all the others are scoring way above it. 

        Postscript - it's now risen to 72, putting it amongst some earlier, shorter "sales" hubs I wrote.

        1. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Couple of things make this different, Judi. 
          1) you get no feedback as to what is "wrong", and must run your low scoring hub through the QAP yourself, trying to be objective, instead of watching Simey or I gleefully rip it apart while detailing in gruesome detail all two of it's spelling errors.  Tough to do on your own writing; if you thought it was bad you wouldn't have written it the way you did!

          2) there is more to hubscore than the QAP, but we don't know what and don't know how much of it is the QAP.  Engagement, for instance is probably still a part of it and that might even include time on page.  I do note that all but one of my 100's (4 now, with 3 99's) are seeing double digit daily traffic and that single exception has 409 for the month; a daily average of double digit.

          1. Gcrhoads64 profile image98
            Gcrhoads64posted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I believe reader engagement is a large part of the score. I have a hub which gets traffic and has all the bells and whistles that HubPages wants. The Hubscore is in the mid 70's though, and I believe it is because of the lack of engagement  -  it only has 2 out of 5 stars.

            Now I just need to figure out how to keep the reader on my page....

            1. wilderness profile image97
              wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              If it doesn't, it would seem to be a prime candidate to become a part of it.  Assuming, of course, that HP can measure time on page.

              1. Will Apse profile image91
                Will Apseposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                They measure it but not very accurately.

                I seem to be one of the few people who ever takes time on page seriously but it is a pretty infallible guide as to whether you have written a page that meets a readers needs. And in my experience, Google soon works out if you have, and delivers the traffic.

                1. wilderness profile image97
                  wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  Agree 100%.  Time on page, IMHO, is one of the most important things we have to judge the value of a page.  And I agree that google pays attention to it, too.

                  I do wish that HP could get a more accurate reading, but we do have google to look at.

                2. paradigmsearch profile image85
                  paradigmsearchposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  I agree. As far as the positive signs go, I would think time-on-page trumps all else.

          2. Judi Bee profile image88
            Judi Beeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Which makes me wonder why my top three hubs, according to Hub Score, have less than 10 hits between them today  smile 

            And the Hub I was originally wondering about is now at a 75.  I've not changed it and it has had no more visitors than usual and no comments.

            Hub Score, another fine mystery from the creators of Hubber Score big_smile

  3. peachpurple profile image78
    peachpurpleposted 4 years ago

    all i could say is Congratulations! Getting 3 hubs to hit 100 are great and i am sure your earnings are raising too. The highest score i could get on my hub is 94, never more than that . What's your secret?

  4. cheaptrick profile image74
    cheaptrickposted 4 years ago

    For months my hubs went bipolar screaming up then down in the dumps...kind of like living with my ex again.
    I thought it was impossible to reach absolute zero till I looked at my scores today...they're so low I have to lie on the floor to see them...and why does that "We're dumping this crappie hub symbol" have to look like a '0' anyway...like rubbing salt in the wound...What's ironic is I still have a mid nineties author score...It's beginning to look like originality is unwelcome around here...HP has become ultra PC...yuck!

  5. Writer Fox profile image77
    Writer Foxposted 4 years ago

    Old Hub
    http://s1.hubimg.com/u/8057944_f248.jpg

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Quick, QAP it!  All hubs must be Qapped!

  6. janderson99 profile image85
    janderson99posted 4 years ago

    Subtle change in policy - the 'Half-Eclipse - Half Moon' hubs (idled for low traffic) now get deindexed and go into the 'Pending' sin bin. The 'low quality' full eclipse ones remind me of bullet holes. Ho Hum! Keep on dancing baby!

    1. wilderness profile image97
      wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      ??MY half moon are just that - half moon and not pending.

      1. janderson99 profile image85
        janderson99posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        But if you edit them, do they go to the swirling sin bin. A long time ago, in a galaxy far away, the half moons used to go straight back to being indexed and featured with a little edit of two, out of jail without passing go.

        http://s1.hubimg.com/u/8058312.jpg

        1. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Oh, I see.  I'm not sure - I've only got one I'm concerned about, and am running a short trial - wanting to wait a bit before editing - so don't know what will happen when I do.

          I assume, though, that it will go to pending.  I wonder if HP has, or could, make it so that a half moon goes to featured upon editing while a full eclipse goes to pending?  That might make good sense if the hub has already passed QAP.

  7. WriteAngled profile image93
    WriteAngledposted 4 years ago

    Well, all I know is that I now have a website with six ex-hubs, where Adsense clicks are increasing nicely in quantity and value, despite the fact I have not touched the site in months and do not follow "stellar" guidelines on having endless photos and a plethora of useless polls and suchlike. The site does not get huge traffic and the separate pages would probably be idled if they had remained as hubs, but the click I got on the site today is worth about 2 weeks of the HP Ads+Adsense earnings I am getting on my remaining 20+ hubs on HP, so I'm happy and it seems Google is as well.

    1. Mark Ewbie profile image83
      Mark Ewbieposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      That is very interesting.  I don't think 'stellar' is the issue for Google - it is the other stuff that surrounds it.

      1. WriteAngled profile image93
        WriteAngledposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Well, I'm happy that I subscribe to a place where I get unlimited web sites with a simplified Wordpress set up (and unlimited non-WP sites as well) included in my subscription. That means all I need to risk further is the price of a domain for one year (often found at discount prices). I buy the domain and set it up. One year later, I can decide if it is bringing in enough to justify renewing the domain or not.

        My sub also gives me access to loads of training material on setting up and marketing web sites. Unfortunately, i have not had enough spare time to look into this at all.

  8. WriteAngled profile image93
    WriteAngledposted 4 years ago

    Well, I've just deleted another hub on another account and moved it to a web site I have not touched since I set it up a couple of years ago. That site is also currently earning more from Adsense than I am earning from HP Ads + HP-related Adsense.

     
    working