Not a staggering increase, around twenty percent, but very welcome,.
Seems to be across the board, from my best pages to the also-rans.
This is what I need for Xmas.
....and the Alexa traffic rank has been steadily improving since it bottomed out a few weeks ago. Things are looking up!
You're much better off looking at hubpages traffic stats on Quantcast. They're directly measured there, rather than guessed.
Been seeing the normal and some boosts, depending on the HP account. Nothing really negative. To me, things seem to be looking up.
I've been updating pages. If no one else is seeing a big jump, I will put it down to that.
This is what it looks like in analytics (hourly traffic view). Something is going on.
Someone should ask if graphic depictions of violence against women have a place in these forums...
But anyway, my traffic increase is about 40 percent now, so I am delighted.
Mine is up by about 25% without doing anything. Because of some of the topics, it goes up this time of year. The upswing was too quick though. Maybe changing from sub-domains has helped???
Maybe it was the subs change, maybe it was editbot, maybe Google's new RankBrain decided to favor us, maybe it was an algo we have never even heard of...
Whatever it was, I would like it to last.
A woman speaks out of turn and gets her brains blown out. The guy is delighted that there is 'one less'. Hmm.
You are lucky the mods here focus on name calling and lack the judgement to recognize genuinely offensive material.
This might be one for twitter.
Whoa! I'm seeing the same thing, Will. I hope it's real. Not often I see a spike like this. Fingers crossed that it continues.
The traffic boost might have to do with Google's last algorithm update; I recall someone from Google saying the effects of it would occur slowly over time. It's been a couple months since the update, maybe it's finally having an effect, and a good effect.
Yes, nice little boost! (Probably holding a meeting now at Google HQ as to how they can stamp the site down again! Sorry to sound cynical! lol)
My only concern was tampering with the site so close to the busy xmas period, but if it works out, I will be pleased!
I must admit, I was worried about mixing with the riff-raff but no harm has has come of it, so far.
It will be interesting to see what this means site-wide as it works through on Quantcast.
I did like the discipline imposed by subdomains, once I got used to it. If you allowed your site to get too crassly commercial or low quality, you were punished. Now we are once again reliant on HP to stop the crap through auto rules and minimal direct human monitoring - hard to keep tabs on so many users and hubs, though.
HP is up to 85 in the Quantcast Top 100, it slipped out of the top 100 altogether a few months back!
That's true Paul, but the reason for this move was the fact that our subdomains were no more being considered as such. They were all standing on their own, but at the same time the drawbacks of some subdomains was harming the rest.
This is certainly the weakness of the recent move. If HP regains authority and starts to rank well, there will be a flood of affiliate marketers returning to the site, who have nothing to offer besides spam and no concerns about avoiding Panda on a sub they are responsible for.
I am not averse to making money through highly commercial pages but I am willing to contribute useful stuff (and enjoy doing it).
My old thing about fifty per cent of pages being affiliate-ad free is one option. Tightening up on QAP is another.
I reckon HP are desperate for new pages, though, and if the supply was choked off by overly rigorous control it might threaten the site.
Dilemmas on top of dilemmas!
I am returning to the pleasures of my traffic boost.
It's far too soon too tell. I grow weary constantly encountering people here who clearly do not care about the welfare of this site or the writers within it. Personally, I preferred the subdomains, but it did not appear they were protecting us from these types of people. I think the team is really tightening up in an attempt to rid us of "the riff raff" and just love hearing the complaints by people who clearly are blatantly violating the TOS. They threaten to leave, and I say "good riddance". We need to get back to being a quality site full of people who are interested in producing good content, avoiding spam and making a buck, too.
A downside for me is that I broke up my original account into numerous subdomains (on the don't put all your eggs in one basket principle) and then created a few more accounts as experiments, on top of that my two Squidoo accounts were then migrated over to HP... So now I have 11 accounts that I have to sign into individually to check up on them and edit, and with the subdomains gone, the set up doesn't really serve any purpose anymore. I probably have to rationalise now and amalgamate at least a few of them, maybe bite the bullet and do some deleting too. More fookin work.
My traffic appears to be up marginally according to HubPages - but not across the board.
Google Analytics however think otherwise - my profile is pretty flat.
Percentage increases can look huge when hubs getting little traffic get more e.g. a hub which has consistently got one visitor a day gets two visitors looks like a 100% increase in traffic - which is why the 'y axis' numbers really matter when it comes to interpretation of trends
Of course it also depends on whether it is real traffic (you can get spikes for all sorts of reasons) - and so far as HubPages's business model is concerned whether it is:
* traffic recognised by Google
* which then converts to an increased income stream
* is capable of being maintained over time - every new URL gets a little surge in traffic when it appears. Whether it continues to enjoy it is another matter!
Time will tell.
Same here. Improvement but slightly unsure about figures. There was a jump when Squidoo came on board - some people ran around whooping - and then... not so good.
Too early to tell.
The spike I have experienced on HP is there in Google Analytics as well. That is comforting. I am still waiting to see how earnings were affected on Sunday.
I agree. I have seen some steady improvement as well.
Let's keep to the original posting, shall we?
My traffic has increased about 8%
My traffic has increased 10% or so on already published hubs but a new hub that I'm in the process of finishing has already had 33 visits - unprecedented - and that one isn't yet published. Could it be a glitch?
Ooo, does sound like a glitch. Except, as Solaras said, I also saw the increase on my Google Analytics account. Though traffic has dropped off a bit today; though I think that's a normal fluctuation.
Ten percent is a healthy result.
As to your new hub, I would check your referrers (in stats). Might be MTurk (though 30 sounds a bit excessive).
Fingers crossed that the changes have had a positive effect on traffic - I have seen a steady rise in traffic for the last few days and I am now back to where I was before the last dip that I saw.. So about 30% up.. Just hope that things stay that way...
The sad thing is that Quantcast shows absolutely no improvement in traffic. This may change but right now it looks as if there are winners and losers amongst the writers but no progress for the site.
I have never "bought" Janderson's theory that somehow, Google has set a quota for HubPages traffic and we all go up and down within than quota - now you've got me worried!
Paul Edmondson once said it was possible that HP was constrained by its link juice. More link juice more rank, static link juice, static traffic.
Paul Edmondson once said it was possible that HP was constrained by its link juice. More link juice, more rank, more traffic, static link juice, static traffic.
Who knows? Sounds a bit mechanistic to me.
Yeah you could say that, but then again plenty of hubs are gone unfeatured due to the new amazon rule. That's probably a lot of the hubs. Only a few people come to the forums to complain. And some of them were getting good traffic.
Not saying that that's a good sign, but it could be good all across the board, just that the board is become smaller?
Signs of a break out from Quota at the end of September. Standby for a reset - signs that it has already started. Note: Too early to see the impact of sinking of the subs.
Just discovered another possible reason for the traffic boost: The 301 redirects. Evidently there is an initial traffic boosts with the redirects because two urls can rank for the same query. See Paul Edmonson's Hub here: http://hubpages.com/business/What-Happe … Large-Site
That might also explain what happened with the Squidoo transfer I guess.
This is what we were originally led to expect (from HP blog):
'We have done some small scale tests so far. In our initial test, we saw some pages get removed from the results and stop ranking for a few days to about a week. After about a week, they returned to their previous rankings and traffic level.'
Now, it is all so much more complex, apparently.
Wait and see...
I entirely agree. I don't think you can draw any sound conclusions until the new arrangements have been operating for at least a month.
I am down about 50% and it's been a slow decline. It has also been more than a week. I did redirects for almost all the pages of one of my own websites and the traffic did eventually come back. The only thing I don't know is whether Google will prefer different hubs than it did in the past as it re-indexes our hubs. I just want you to know that all of you who are getting huge amounts of traffic or whatever may be offset by people like me.
One other thought... If the initial test was only in the autos category and it took up to one week to see hubs reestablished, then it might take even longer with the larger amount of hubs that were redirected with the entire site move.
and that, sadly, is the way it has always been. I'm sorry to hear your views are down because I know that in the past you have done well here. Been there, and it ain't fun!
It's not the first time for me to be down. I think 2011 was my best year. I appreciate your thoughts, but I'm still hopeful that my hubs will recover. It's just going to be a little longer, as you've mentioned, than 1 week.
Don't compare anything to 2011. That was a really weird year with a lot of false traffic appearing in people's stats which is why Google started focusing on clearing house soon after.
Have faith. A bit more than a year ago, my entire main subdomain lost 90% of its views overnight. I had no warning or explanations from Google. I was devastated.
I turned to the forums for help and got plenty of great advice, just about all of which I followed.
Never did find out why this happened (and no, I do not do any of the "no nos"), but today, after a whole lot of revamping, updating, deleting, etc, my views are pretty good again. Not quite the way they were prior to the crash, but I actually made more money this year than I did the year when things were originally going so well.
So, it can happen, but you may have to do a lot of work to make it happen.
Another writer on here (actually more than one), also took a big hit and never did recover, so it's hard to know.
Anyhow, I hope you're able to get back on track.
If you saved those articles that you deleted last year, you can upload them again now. You no longer have a subdomain - the articles are residing with the other articles in the same category. So no need to have a niche anymore.
Could be the best year for you ever lol!
That is assuming that Google can not tell the difference between HP authors. If that advice is correct, a HP author can publish whatever he wants and all the articles will be ranked the same. I am not sure this is the case, despite what I have heard here on the forums.
The forums have been wrong before. Be careful.
Why would you say that?
Articles on a website are never "all ranked the same". A website is judged by Google on its overall quality and assigned a Panda score. Within the website, each article is then ranked on its individual merits, but then it's weighted by the Panda score - a good score will push it up in the ranks, a bad score will pull it down.
At one time, Google made a big thing of authorship,but it was an experiment and was dropped in 2014. Building authority as an author is still worth doing, because you get more traffic indirectly (through people sharing links as your reputation grows), but it's not a direct factor in ranking:
http://searchengineland.com/authorship- … hip-217209
Since no one who posts on here actually knows, including HP staff, it was my impression that the opinions viewed on these forums are just opinions based on personal experience.
My opinion, based on traffic, is that niches matter a lot. Do you think that they do not? Okay, follow the gurus on the websites (many of which are outdated or just guesses). But, if you give that advice to others that are following the niches and doing okay, I will give conflicting advice.
I cannot state that my advice is more correct than yours, but then again neither can you state that your advice is more correct than mine.
The thing is, DrMark, do you have another sub-domain of the same size, which is NOT a niche? If you don't, then how do you know whether you'd be doing better or worse without a niche? It's impossible to say.
I've seen lots of people talk about focussing on a niche in their sub-domain, and my view was always - it probably won't help but it can't hurt. Now I'm 100% sure that it won't help, but if it makes people feel better, it still can't hurt.
No, I do not, so I cannot say that it is doing better than a site that is not a niche. But how can you say you are 100% sure about any of this?
(Of course we all know that Google blogs are 100% reliable and anything that comes out of their headquarters can be believed, right? I would stake my life on it.)
Well, I have, and have had, both types of sites here at HP, and while I cannot know for sure, I do feel that my niche site has done better overall, but that may be due to the topics I have chosen to write about.
If we are now rated on our individual hubs in addition to overall site ratings, then what does it matter? What is upsetting that I worked very hard to revamp my site so that it would be a niche site, and now that's all basically for nothing.
I don't think you can draw that conclusion.
Your subdomain had a dip in traffic and you removed many of your non-RV Hubs in an attempt to improve things - but you made lots of other changes and improvements too, so your subdomain might well have recovered even without deleting anything.
Your non-niche subdomain hasn't done well - but it is much "younger" than your RV subdomain so you can't really compare.
There are things I'm sure about and things that are theories. I have always said I couldn't see why it would help to specialize - I have never said people shouldn't specialize if they want to.
The reason I have always warned against specializing on HubPages is that when people do decide to focus on a niche, it usually means they delete tens or even hundreds of perfectly good articles - which were getting traffic! - because they didn't fit their niche. For a theory that is untried and unproven, that's a big risk to take. If they were just starting out with no articles, then they can do what they like (although I'd still say, if you have a niche, start a blog instead - because at least we know that niches work well on blogs).
The information about how articles are ranked and how Panda works - straight from Google. You'll have to dig a bit to find it now, since it was all explained some time ago. Personally I trust Searchengineland for good advice, and so do a great many professional website owners who know far more than I do - so many "internet guru" websites are outdated or offer dubious advice, but Searchengineland is extremely well respected.
Hi Solaras. Explain "So no need to have a niche anymore" because we no longer have subdomains. Do you mean that since all articles are in one place, writing on a particular topic no longer builds authority for the author? Then niches are only good for linking your articles in hope of increasing traffic/readership? Makes sense if that's what you mean.
Makes sense? That seems to be the flavor of the day from the forum gurus. As I mentioned above, after Solaras posted that comment, I would be hesitant to follow it.
According to what I have read here, multiple articles no longer build authority and are no longer any good for increasing traffic/readership.
A lot of people never took the niche thing seriously. Given all the interlinking of articles on this site there is no way Google would see an article here as being from a niche site.
Also, of course, Google's authorship project is long dead.
Quote: 'Authorship markup is no longer supported in web search.'
https://support.google.com/webmasters/a … 3347?hl=en
Do you think that the following qoute is no longer correct?
"2.3 Your Money or Your Life (YMYL) Pages
"Some types of pages could potentially impact the future happiness, health, or wealth of users. We call such pages “Your Money or Your Life” pages, or YMYL. The following are for YMYL Content pages:
• Shopping or financial transaction pages: webpages which allow users to make purchases, transfer money, pay bills, etc. online (such as online stores and online banking pages).
• Financial information pages: webpages which provide advice or information about investments, taxes, retirement planning, home purchase, paying for college, buying insurance, etc.
• Medical information pages: webpages which provide advice or information about health, drugs, specific diseases or conditions, mental health, nutrition, etc.
• Legal information pages: webpages which provide legal advice or information on topics such as divorce, child custody, creating a will, becoming a citizen, etc.
• Other: there are many other topics which you may consider YMYL, such as child adoption, car safety information, etc. Please use your judgment".
For content YMYL is mentioned at 4.3, Expertise / Authoritativeness / Trustworthiness (E-A-T), 4.7, and then at 4.9 shows examples of high quality pages - Total YMYL = 14; Medical = 5. For content further found at 6.3, 6.4, 6.5.5 followed by 6.6 - Examples of Low Quality articles specific for YMYL; 3 with 1 for medical.
Stated is "We have very high Page Quality rating standards for YMYL pages because low quality YMYL pages could potentially negatively impact users’ happiness, health, or wealth." Then the focus switches to Websites."
I am curious because I see some authors getting a lot of page views (like Tahoe Doc) and others, who write about all sorts of things, getting very few page views.
A note is that quote came for the internal General Guidelines 5.0 published 03/31/14 for Google. It is used for their human outsourcing for reviewing purposes as internal publication. It was leaked. I guess that may be where the MTurk idea came from?
Hummingbird algorithm release was the fall of '13 I believe? The quote is in the section for content pages as well as those other references. The guide is 160+ pages. The Content page quality section is 64+ pages. Interesting with humor there is a subsection for forums and questions as content. Following Part 1: Page Quality Rating Guide is Part 2: Utility Rating Guide, then Part 3: Block Utility Rating Guide, and finally Part 4: Using the Evaluation Platform.
The latter 3 seems more pointed toward blogs and websites I guess? No matter it is mind boggling to me. Reading Part 1 I easily see the emphasis HP has today with their overall strategy while that too is mind boggling for me somewhat. A learning process.
Here is a link to a source for the leaked Guide at Search Engine Land. There is a link to it as well as the earlier four guides - 2008, 2011, 2012, 2013 most likely coordinating with Panda and Penguin.
But the point is, tsmog - what does that have to do with whether it's worth having a niche or not? No relevance as far as I can see.
Well done for that. I have wanted to give a link to that scribd doc several times but feared the wrath of the internet.
Everyone should read it.
I took a look at the articles where that info came from. The most recent was written almost a year ago. I could not find anything current.
However, I do think it is important for writers to be careful about what they post because it is easy to forget that there are millions of readers who see words on a page and take them for gospel, regardless of the source.
I think many forget that there are real human beings reading what they write that can be harmed by the advice they give, but I also think it is difficult to know exactly where to draw the line.
I think Google is right to try to rank authority higher when judging the quality of posts, but I'm not exactly sure how they do this.
If they were doing a good job, I think many posts would be obliterated and only those produced by experts would remain standing. So far, I'm not seeing that.
I do not think it would be a good idea to obliderate all posts except those made by experts. After all, these forum statements are only opinions. When you were told to go ahead and get rid of your niche and start publishing whatever you feel like, maybe the poster was incorrect. You might find out a few months from now when you start getting 50% less page views.
Or maybe not. No one, including those people who published on here that "the niche is dead", know for sure. And, as you mentioned in your statement "I think Google is right to try to rank authority higher when judging the quality of posts, but I'm not exactly sure how they do this." Neither do they.
I started a second site last December specifically for the purposes of writing on a variety of topics. I have left my main site as a niche, and I like it that way for many reasons, the main one being that I can link the articles together easily and group them more specifically.
My second site has not done well because I keep experimenting with different topics. So far, nothing has stood out as being an earner or page view winner.
@Blake - I doubt it was 2011, or if it was, it was the early part of that year. That was the year the new Panda algorithm hit, and wiped out over 75% of HubPages' traffic overnight. My best year was 2010.
It is early days yet but I am seeing a consistent boost in views.
I think it might be a different story for everyone but updating seems to help a lot.
Pretty good advice above on subjects to avoid (unless you are relaying your personal experience as victim, client, patient etc) but I don't see the relevance to niche sites.
I stopped believing the subs were well enough insulated for Google to consider them standalones a very long time ago. If they were not standalones, niche meant nothing.
Exactly. When they were first introduced and for a long time after, the sub-domains WERE insulated from each other to some extent - that was what enabled good writers to get their articles ranked well, because they were not dragged down by the poor Panda scores of other sub-domains.
However for some peculiar reason - perhaps because of the inter-linking across topics - I never saw any evidence that a niche sub-domain did any better, on average, than a varied sub-domain. I never understood why that should be, considering that a blog MUST specialise or die.
When traffic started to drop again, some people thought focussing on a niche would make a difference - not because anyone had proved it to be so, but because it works for blogs.
When Google suddenly stopped recognising the sub-domains as separate entities (was that 2014? I can't recall), the whole idea of a niche became irrelevant, IMO. Now that the sub-domains are gone, they're certainly irrelevant because Google is not recognising individual Hubber accounts as individual.
I've always wondered why HubPages doesn't set up a side business which makes the templates and structure sitting behind a hub available for a small fee - and then allowed people to set up their own websites (using the HubPages infrastructure) using their own unique domain names. (ie. NOT part of one big site but more like the non-free Wordpress - complete independenve for information sharers + techincal support)
In other words stuff the internal traffic and trying to promote other people's hubs and just do the old proverbial "stick to the knitting" thing and create a template for people to create their own wiki.
That way HubPages gets a guaranteed income and we get a guaranteed template which works
* those who want an ad free writing zone can have one
* those who want to go commercial can do so without moderation. How well it works is entirely down to them
* Plus most of can stop worrying about ad blockers and what impact the new Apple ad blocker will have - because let's face it a website which depends on income from advertising is on very dodgy subsoil.
Thank you to everyone who has commented here. You know the science behind HubPages, and I thank you for sharing! I could never have guessed that gravy was involved. You learn something new every day! Seriously though, congratulations to everyone who has experienced a traffic increase. May the good news continue.
I have been noticing a small increase in views. Its a positive!
There are lots of way to increase traffic to your website, backlinks, blog dofollow comments, forum backlinks etc etc.
I've been in SEO for over 5 months and therefore, I know lots of things about this field.
by Buildreps17 months ago
Just checked it on Alexa.com, and realized which (alleged) effect the Panda updates of Google has on traffic. Although I'm still happy with the traffic my Hubs have, are the foundations increasingly eroding. Are there...
by Person of Interest16 months ago
The expectation and plan is for this to be a happy, fun thread. We shall see...Last year my seasonal traffic increase began the very first week of September, but Labor Day was September 1st. This year the starting line...
by Person of Interest20 months ago
Jeez, I check my stats this morning and it's a disaster. I run to Quantcast and discover it's all of HubPages and not just me. What the heck is going on? I even rushed to a calendar website to see if there was something...
by Blake Flannery14 months ago
This is a side by side comparison of my hub traffic compared to the Quantcast graph for the same last two year period. So, what are the implications? What are your experiences?
by Writer Fox2 years ago
If you do, how is search traffic to your articles there? Has there been a recent change from the Google Panda or Penguin updates? Would you recommend this site to other writers?
by Dr. John Anderson13 months ago
It appears that traffic, after the restructure to sink the subs, has stabilised to a new Panda "Quota" of 750 K which is down 15-20% from the 2015 traffic trend (850 K) . No sign of recovery - but here's...
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.