Yes, everybody thinks their favorite topic area deserves its own niche site. But in the case of "History" I think there really are some very valid reasons why this is so.
History differs from many other topic areas in that searchers are often really researchers. They don't just jump on the first or second listed article, but may look at dozens of titles to find the ones they think can give authoritative information on the topic they are researching. And in assessing authority, the name of the site definitely makes a difference.
When I’m doing research, and having to choose from among dozens of listings the several I want to invest my time in actually reading, the site name acts as a filter for eliminating the ones that are probably so frivolous I don’t need to waste time on them.
The image above illustrates my point. It shows the Google listing for my hub, "Tuskegee Airmen History: The Freeman Field Mutiny." Note that the source site, Owlcation, is prominently listed on both the headline and the url line.
Now, look at the two listings under mine. The sources shown for these are the Library of Congress site for one, and the google.books.com listing of a Lt. Colonel's book for the other.
If you were researching "the Freeman Field Mutiny," which site name gives the greatest sense of historical authority? And based on that, which articles would most likely claim your valuable reading time? I fear that in that contest, “Owlcation” would come in last.
There are tons of articles on HubPages that could fit into a history niche site. I think that doing them justice, and giving them the best chance of being read, demands that they have their own appropriately named site.
I totally agree with you Ron.
According to The Complete List of Topics on HubPages, we have a treasure chest of (over 3000) potential hubs to fill a history site.
HubPages»Education and Science»History & Archaeology»World History (148 hubs)
Plus, all these hubs:
History of Africa (43 Hubs)
History of Asia (220 Hubs)
History of China (28 Hubs)
History of India (142 Hubs)
History of Japan (21 Hubs)
History of Europe (280 Hubs)
History of England (83 Hubs)
History of France (14 Hubs)
History of Ireland (37 Hubs)
History of Spain (7 Hubs)
The Viking Age (14 Hubs)
History of Oceania & Pacific Islands (27 Hubs)
History of the Americas (819 Hubs)
American History (588 Hubs)
Colonial America (42 Hubs)
Slavery in America (17 Hubs)
The American Civil War (84 Hubs)
The American Revolution (55 Hubs)
Latin American History (16 Hubs)
Native American History (156 Hubs)
Precolumbian & Mesoamerican History (33 Hubs)
History of the Middle East (91 Hubs)
History of Egypt & Mesopotamia (68 Hubs)
Persian History (3 Hubs)
History of the Modern Era (905 Hubs)
Eighteenth Century History (45 Hubs)
Modern Times (48 Hubs)
Nineteenth Century & Victorian History (116 Hubs)
Seventeenth Century History (21 Hubs)
Twentieth Century History (634 Hubs)
1900s & 1910s (18 Hubs)
1920s (9 Hubs)
1930s (8 Hubs)
1940s (18 Hubs)
1950s (8 Hubs)
1960s (24 Hubs)
1970s (5 Hubs)
1980s (8 Hubs)
1990s (6 Hubs)
20th Century Nostalgia & Experiences (23 Hubs)
The Great Depression (7 Hubs)
World War I (196 Hubs)
Battles of World War I (18 Hubs)
Important Figures of World War I (23 Hubs)
Weapons & Technologies of World War I (24 Hubs)
World War II (250 Hubs)
Battles of World War II (31 Hubs)
Holocaust History (21 Hubs)
Intellectual History (45 Hubs)
Major Inventions & Discoveries (157 Hubs)
Science through History (18 Hubs)
Technology through History (41 Hubs)
Middle Ages & Renaissance History (173 Hubs)
Military History (279 Hubs)
Maybe HP management would be willing to engage interested authors (experts) to help sive through all this potential content? If we shared out the work load, we would achieve more quicker, better.
This idea could apply to other topics that need their own sites, like photography, the arts etc.
It's all very well employing new moderators, but what expertise do they have? All they can achieve after some training is check HP guidelines.
I don't think any of us know how many of these pages are genuinely worthwhile.
Quantity is actually harmful if they all covering similar topics in a mediocre way.
Will, I don't think quality will be a problem. As Sue has so helpfully demonstrated, there are north of 3000 hubs under the History category. Suppose that 90 percent of them are trash. That still leaves 300+ high-quality articles to start a history niche site. How many other history sites have that wealth of good material?
Like Sue and you mentioned, there are enough articles to make a niche site on a main category.
Photography alone has;
Art Photo Essays 24
Digital Photography 79
Nature & Wildlife Photography 69
Photographic Portraits 23
Photographic Equipment 34
Photographic Instructions & How to's 132
That's over 1,112 photo related articles.
Great job, Sue, pulling these numbers down. There are even more history hubs than I realized. It just reinforces my belief that we already have enough quality articles to populate a niche site.
Fat chance. HP seems to be trowing hubs from different and unrelated categories into niches that seem more like a hodgepodge as opposed to authoritative sites.
History does deserve its own site just like photography/visual arts does.
Take for example photography next to 'How to Make Balloon Animals'. Really?????
I don't know what these "niches" are but they are definitely not niche in any way ,shape or form!
niche: 1. pertaining to or intended for a market niche; having specific appeal
2. A niche website focuses on a group of people in a larger market with a common specific interest.
Please tell me what 'Cutting Wood at Home Depot,The Right Way' has to do with visual arts?
TO HP STAFF
What is considered the minimum number of articles for a successful niche site. Is there a maximum number of articles or is the sky the limit?
I agree that there needs to be a better breakdown of the niche sites. Pethelpful works because pets easily combine in one logical category. Visual Arts, Performing Arts, History each deserves its own site. If they are short on articles, make a series of contests to round out the categories needed.
OK, so we all agree that there is plenty of content that could find a good home on sites for:
1. History (over 3000 hubs)
2. Performing Arts (1498 hubs)
3. Photography (730 hubs)
Any more? Fine Arts?
The problem seems to be the workload for HP staff, and also the lack of expert knowledge.
So... since we are here anyway, some of us experts, ready and willing to help...
What about offering to volunteer to sieve through some of that content and submit those articles we think are worthy of inclusion, to the team?
I would be prepared to take on Performing Arts, with a little help from others who are also experts on that subject. Marisa, are you in? (team willing of course)
What about you Luis for Photography?
And Ron for History?
I'm sure if we worked together with the team, we would achieve better results. I also think that if this was to go ahead, we should be consulted about the choice of domain names prior to launch.
Here is the The Complete List of Topics on HubPages again. Get searching! (Ctr.F)
With over 30 years experience I would give it a go in a heartbeat!
Great Louis !
An independent Photography site in particular has tremendous commercial potential. Think of how advertisers for cameras, equipment, studio space, modeling agencies, etc. would jump at the opportunity to place their ads on a good Photography site instead of the current situation where photography is buried on feltmagnet.
B.t.w. It took me half an hour to even find Photography in the list of new niche sites among totally unrelated topics.
Not only is the name really bad and misleading, (the name suggests a site for crafts with felt and magnets) but a serious photographer whether amateur or pro would probably not pay too much attention to a site with that name or alongside all the other totally unrelated topics. It just cannot be taken seriously.
I think they bought the domain names all in one block at the same time, quite some time ago. I don't think they would or even can change them at this point.
I have a lot of Greek Myth that has a lot of views, but Humanities is in, you guessed it, History. I would offer to help but my expertise is in Astrology and metaphysical things. You guys are great to offer though, it appears they need help.
I notice I always get emails about hubs that have been edited and moved in the evening, or even pretty late at night. So they must be hiring or asking some to work P/T to help.
But we are not asking them to change any existing site names, just begging for a few additional sites:
. performing arts
... maybe a few others
into which currently ill-placed content could be moved. And then a lot more content could be added to those additional sites.
It is obvious that with the enormous volume of content and topics on HP we need many more sites than just the 25 new sites launched so far. Like you said, Jean, some of the new sites have too many categories that are far too diverse to make true niche sites.
Let us hope that this is only a beginning.
And we have to hope the people who run HP agree. All the topics mentioned on this thread are too big to be lumped in together. It defeats the purpose of the change. I've had 35 hubs moved to niche sites now, but want to cry when I see what they did to them. Some are reduced to bullet points. They seem to feature one black and white photo at the top, which doesn't make it look interesting for a potential reader. And they take all your subtitles and put them in a grey blob, when a nice pastel would look better. But I wrote them long ago, and the money is so much better, I've decided to let it go.
Also, you can change some things you really can't stand after they are done with the hub and it's been moved, as long as you have one Amazon capsule and the pictures are attributed and legal.
Thank you Ron, for being willing to volunteer to pick out the best of all articles on history. Collaboration is the call of the day. This is a real possibility now that we are soon going to get an option for submitting articles for inclusion in the new sites.
The only crucial question is whether the team agrees to create new niche sites for:
. performing arts and
Let us hope for a positive response on Monday when they get back to work. However, like everything else in the world today, money rules.
We have already established that photography can sell many products.
performing arts too has commercial potential. Ads selling anything to do with the theater:
studio rehearsal space
props, prop makers, materials for prop making
musical instruments, speakers, and equipment for orchestras
costumes and jewelry - ballet shoes, ballet bars, studio flooring,
lighting equipment and installation
scenery design and manufacture
What could a history sight sell? Books, research material and services?
If we can convince the team that the proposed sites are commercially viable, I think we could be on a winner.
I agree. I also think that Touring, Motorbiking and Travel should have their own niche sites.
by Glenn Stok2 days ago
I noticed that hubs in niche sites no longer include the "More by this author" section below the hub. Is this just an oversight or was it a decision to drop it on niche sites?
by Juliette Kando3 months ago
Four months ago some of us noticed that certain topics were ill-distributed on the new vertical sites. Now that the sites are up and running more or less successfully, is it now time to rekindle the discussion /...
by Anne4 weeks ago
Can you explain why, after I asked you not to edit my hubs you have gone in on many occasions and changed them to the point - I hardly wrote any of it. I look at my earning from Amazon and when you started your changes...
by Scott Bateman4 months ago
I have been pleased with the audience and revenue for my articles on HubPages since joining the site some years ago.I commend the company for creating the successful niche sites at a time when similar sites were...
by Scott Bateman3 months ago
I'm very happy with the results of the niche sites. It's a win-win for HubPages and writers like myself. But I'm a bit curious about the process for choosing Hubs that go on those sites.One of my most successful Hubs on...
by John D Wilson3 months ago
The chart showed a loss of about 55% of the traffic on Hubpages in the last 6 months.I also looked at the traffic trends on some of the niche sites, and they don't seem to be making up for the loss.In fact the bounce...
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.