I fail to see the need for the "related hub" section on each of my hub pages. Sometimes these hubs do not really relate to mine. Readers come to our pages to read the hubs we wrote or because they like to follow us. Pulling our readers away to other hubs is not quite fair.
There are plenty of other places on the site where every hub / author / category can be found - why put them where they distract from our hub and often take a reader away before they reach the voting and comment sections?
I think we should do away with "related hubs" and just have our own "previous and next" hubs showing that are in the same category.
I agree 100%, Phyllis. I have noticed that many of the hubs do not even remotely touch on the subject of my hub. Yes, they could very well take readers away from our hubs before they vote or comment! However, we never know if that is exactly how some readers may have found their way to our hubs as well.
I like the related hub feature. They list them at the bottom and for my hubs at least, the topics are very related. Granted my hubs are not as diverse as others. But the feature has led me to find some great articles and authors. I read the article first then I take a look at related material. It's sort of HP is all about.
Well, Phyllis, there are a lot of good reasons stated here as to why the related hubs are good for traffic to our hubs. Plus, now that I think about it, some of my own hubs show up as related hubs on my own hubs at times.
That could possibly be the case where our hubs have appeared on other ones. Anyway I can also see the opinion that they can also distract any reader from leaving comments. A different system should be set up.
I recently had a couple of hubs that had a great run on social media. Because of them I also picked up many views through the "related hubs" feature. In my case, I got a lot more traffic from related hubs than through the "more by this author" or the prev/next links. That was true on both the hubs that were getting a lot of social media traffic, so I don't think it was an anomaly. "Related hubs" has been very positive for me, and I wouldn't at all want to see it eliminated.
hahaha - key word stuffing is using a word that is one of the main words in the title of a hub - in this case the word "hub". You (Faith) used the word several times in one sentence. This is no big deal and rather amusing the way you did it. If a sentence like that was used in a hub, Google would see it as "key word stuffing" and downgrade the hub. In the forum thread, it is no problem and I was just teasing you.
The sentence was: "Yes, I do believe some traffic may be getting to my hubs from my hubs being related hubs under other hubbers' hubs."
Since HP is unlikely to change this feature to your liking, the best thing you can do is write several hubs on the same topic. That way the related articles section will be populated with links to your own work rather than other people's. Next time you think of something to write about, think about how you can make 3 or 4 hubs out of it.
True, I write on one particular niche and all my related hubs are my own blogs. But mine gets linked with other hubbers since they write on different niches. So on that particular topic, I would most likely appear on their site as a related hub! Alleluia! That's additional click rates for me!
I've also been totally pro Related Hubs for the reasons the others have stated; Related Hubs have sent much traffic my way. However, what with the EC label thing now in effect, and the low-hubscore banishment situations; my opinion has gone to undecided for the time being.
What I'm basically saying is that Related Hubs is a very good thing, if only it weren't for the labels. I don't see how this is off topic. You ask in your original post for hubbers' thoughts on Related Hubs, and that's what I think. I also mention in my post that there are other threads discussing the topic of labels, which is why I didn't go into it further.
I've got a set of hubs like that, where all the "related" links are my own hubs.
Not sure it's a real good idea, though - I interlink the hubs via textual links, the "more by" leads to another of the same set, the "group" links are all the same set and then the "related" ones are added to the list. A lot of links all to the same small set of hubs.
I think the "previous and next" is a very good feature - mainly because readers are drawn to not just a particular hub, but a particular author. I have a lot of topics I write on and make sure each category has at least three hubs in it, so I activate the previous and next feature.
I've always kinda liked them. Since my notifications seem to be limited to the last few writers whose hubs I read, it has led me to some new writers on subjects of interest and to some new friends. I never thought about a downside. Now I'm thinkin'....
I somehow agree with you but I think that this is a good step to help other hubbers with the traffic of their hubs.. Some are just not lucky enough or capable of getting their hubs shown in Google search, while others might.. This has never disturbed me actually but I do agree with you though..
I am for 'related hubs' as when I am reading someone elses hub I often peruse the "related hubs" section and find others that interest me, often by hubbers I am not already familiar with. Hence a new contact.
At the bottom of the lens it has related hubs. Is there a way to exclude some hubs from showing there, or to encourage better (more related) ones by limiting the category or using keywords or hand picking them or...
Do you have ideas on ways HP could improve the site or its usability in the coming year? No flaming, please; hoping to have some serious and helpful suggestions for staff to consider.Please share your ideas on:...
In light of the recent barrage of "alleged" copyright violations from sites that use my content without my permission, I'm wondering why one particular hubber has visited one of my hubs over 600 times. I'm...
I have seen a few mentions of putting our articles into groups but when I went to put in a heading I found myself stopping because I wasn't sure what to put there. Do we go broad categories ie: foodie:healthOr use...