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 a niche site has more than 1,250 words, multiple photos and an original video. I have checked it carefully for grammar and spelling.
Another Hub has all of the exact same attributes, plus some original photos, but it has not been chosen for the same niche site.
I understand HP looks for Hubs with certain characteristics. I want to produce Hubs with the qualities that lead to publication on a niche site. So I'm trying to understand if I did something wrong with the second Hub, but I just don't see it.
Have any of you experienced the same thing?
Paul Edmundson recommended people go over their hubs checking for typos and improving them according to their 'stellar hub's guidelines. He reckoned if there was little for a copy editor to do, there was more chance of getting the page moved.
Some hubbers have reported that overhauled hubs have been moved.
I would also take the score thing seriously. Add tables, polls, videos until you are well into the 80's. Amazon capsules, above a certain number, at least, depress scores.
None of this is guaranteed to produce a result, lol. Its a percentage game...
Thanks, Will. I spellcheck all of my Hubs. Some of them that haven't moved to niche sites have scores in the upper 80s. So the scores don't seem to be a factor.
I think "prettying up" some of those older hubs helps too. I have been adding callout capsules, making more of my images full width, etc. I had 2 moved last week and just found 3 more moved over to a niche site this morning.
Did you get a notice that they were moved?
Yes, they let me know.
Since I wrote that note I have had a lot more moved, several times per week, and sometimes as many as 5 at a time. It is no longer the ones that get good traffic, since those were moved a long time ago.
Many of them were moved without having Amazon capsules removed or otherwise snipped.
I think the editing is what the curators are noticing.
Yes you are notified when they're moved.
If they're Hubs that were already existing when the niche sites were published, HubPages stated quite clearly that the main criteria was traffic. The whole idea of the niche sites was to please Google, so they wanted to include Hubs that Google already liked (i.e. that Google was already sending high traffic to).
Once they had moved the high-traffic Hubs, they then looked to see whether any categories were under-represented on the new sites, and went looking for Hubs that were appropriate to fill the gaps.
With new Hubs, they are checking them as they are published (or within a week or two) and moving them if they meet the criteria which they've stated (the ones you get when you submit a site for consideration).
They've also said they are looking for more Hubs to add from the old Hubs, but I don't think we've been told anything about how much effort is going into that.
Actually, this creates a problem for people who write for income.
Now that the best Hubs have moved to niche sites, the ability of HP.com to attract strong rankings on search engines is much lower. I can tell by the numbers on my Hubs that have not moved to niches.
So if I write a Hub and it doesn't go to a niche, the odds of getting traffic and generating income for that Hub will be lower as well. It may be a wasted effort because five hours of work (my average per Hub) will be lost.
So it benefits us (and HubPages) to have a deeper understanding of what is required to get a Hub on a niche site.
Thanks, Marisa. I've been a little weary about submitting some of mine that have a decent amount of traffic because I wasn't quite sure why they hadn't already been selected.
I think a big factor in the equation is simply time. The HP team is working through an immense backlog in assessing existing hubs to be moved to niche sites. Even though they've added staff, it will take time for them to get to many worthy hubs. The fact that a hub hasn't been moved is no indication that it won't be once they get to it. That's why they gave us the ability to nominate a hub we believe should be moved. I do wish that could be done at a greater rate than one every 60 days.
That's a good point, Ron. I agree it would be nice to nominate a Hub more than once every 60 days. Then again, HP editors might not be able to handle that volume, either.
Maybe they could set it up so that you can nominate a Hub within X days based on your Hubber score...
I understand what you mean. I write hubs in series, and usually the whole group of them are almost in the exact same style, same amount of pictures, same quality of writing, etc. But not all of them are chosen.
The answers here are pretty good ones. I think at first they needed hubs to fill the niches, so they were raiding mine like crazy. They took 2 or 3 a day. Now it's been at least a month,and they haven't touched or given advice about one. I think they are concentrating on newer hubs being written now. There are specific sites that can be written for. If the hub hopper was like it used to be, I'd check more to see what new work was coming in.
Once they get more new hubs, I'm sure they will revisit the older ones left on our HP sites, and some of them probably meet the criteria.
If you have hubs in a series that shouldn't be split up, alert the firstname.lastname@example.org about that. They usually are very nice to work with.
I went through the same thing, Jean. A lot of my Hubs went over to niches in a short period of time, then the activity died out.
I'm doing more updates on my existing Hubs that haven't moved to see if it helps.
They have indicated several times that reader engagement is a big factor. Dwell times, perhaps comments, are probably as important as scores.
With older hubs it might be best to try an overhaul of the pages with good dwell times first.
I haven't seen any evidence that new staff is doing anything. I chose a hub to be moved 50 days ago, but it doesn't seem like anyone looked at it and nobody communicated anything to me. I have 9 in the series that are written in the same style, have changed the pictures, used call out capsules, and had no answer at all. I truly don't think I can make the hub any better, it's the same as those they moved.
They have moved many of my hubs though, and I am happy about that. I would like more feedback and clearer rules though. The three they left behind from the 9 they took are no different, and even have more improvements. It's frustrating. And they have been moved to 2 different niches, as Marisa says, they appear to need material for some of the spotty niches that need to be filled up.
I also have a lot of mythology with high views, at least 12, and nobody said anything about them when they made the big movement of my stuff to niches. I saw mythology by the History stuff. And I'm sure there are many hubs that don't fit categories. I have other hubs that will fit in some different niches, but I'm not sure I want to stray too far from my main one. They didn't touch any of them.
It is a monumental job, I just haven't seen any activity since new staff came, if they did.
I think a better criteria would be if you submit a hub that is accepted for a niche site. If the first one you submit is accepted, it's a good indicator that you understand what they are looking for. Then you could submit another right away (perhaps with a limit on how many). If you submit one that is not accepted, then there could be that waiting period before you could submit another.
This seems like it would get more quality hubs moved faster than the staff just working their way through the backlog. I think most writers know which of their hubs are good.
Its a very niche site available. I am very glad to post me thought here.
Sounds good. Giving an ear to what the staff have to say can help.
I think it is important to differentiate between new and old hubs when it comes to understanding the criteria for moving pages.
A definitive staff statement would help. But this is what they have said so far:
They moved high traffic hubs in the early establishment of the niches. Hubscores did not matter too much for this group.
They are moving newly published pages with high QAP scores and zero spam content.
They are working through a backlog of old, high quality, but low traffic hubs. Reader engagement is probably one of the most important factors in the selection process (if there is any reader engagement). Pages with little need for editing have the best chance.
My own take:
They are probably using QAP scores and read times to arrive at some kind of list, then using human eyes to vet individual pages. If they are not doing that, they are daft, lol.
I would love a staff member to contradict any of the above that is not true, so that we all know where we are.
Just to update on this, on another thread Christy said that traffic is still one of the main factors for choosing from existing Hubs.
It may be a factor, but HP has moved several of my hubs that get almost no traffic instead of others that get a lot more daily traffic. Those that have low page views, but were moved anyway, are on subject matter that few people write on, so maybe HP recognizes the potential page views.
I cannot imagine that they are typing the title into Google and finding out how many similar pages exist, but who knows?
I hesitate to say it, but I think they are making exceptions for some Hubbers. For instance, they picked up a bunch of my dance Hubs and moved them wholesale, no editing no nothing. I suspect once they've identified particular Hubbers as being knowledgeable about their field and able to write Hubs to the right standard, you end up on a list!
I haven't had any more dance Hubs moved but I suspect that niche site isn't doing that well so it's not their priority. Whereas they will want to capitalise on the success of the ones that are doing well by filling in the "gaps" in their coverage of some topics.
I also notice that I have a bunch of newer hubs that I revised, have low views, and yet they were moved.
I think it is important to take another look at our older hubs. Sometimes we read them so many times when we published them, we don't realize there are typos or some really do need updating.
Didn't the administration say they plan to add more niches later?
I wonder how that's possible. My remaining Hubs have had a steep decline in traffic since my others moved to the niche sites.
Seems I've not been alone on this. Am new on hubpages and confused on what criteria are used to select articles for niche sites
I recommend sacrificing a goat and sending the eds body parts.
lol. That looks creepier than it was meant to. Still fascinated by the endless reading of the entrails, though. What are the eds up to? What are they making in there?
Here in the civilized world we tell the future by casting cowrie shells. It is a lot less messy than entrails.
Yes, that is curious. The more of my hubs that are moved to the niche sites the more my total views go up, but curiously my articles on the niche sites are not the ones receiving the biggest spike in views. They seem to be the catalyst however.
Some people have theorised that internal competition is a factor.
A few years ago, if there were ten Hubs each deserving to be on the front page of Google's search results, they would all be listed there.
Google decided it didn't like the possibility of one website dominating the front page - so now, it will choose only the best one or two posts from any one website, and ignore the rest.
That's the main reason they are trying not to duplicate things too much on the new niche sites - there's no point having ten scrambled eggs recipes on Delishably, for instance, because only one or two of them will show up on the search results at any one time.
Where it benefits your Hubs that are left behind is obvious. Now that the best Hubs have gone to the niche sites, that has removed your competition so you've got more chance of being the top Hub on HubPages for that topic.
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...
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 John Hansen4 months ago
I have had a few hubs moved to various niche sites with hub scores ranging from 69 to 87. I feel I have much better hubs remaining on the original site than some of those selected to move, especially my latest which was...
by Carolee Samuda2 years ago
I decided not to leave hubpages but since my traffic was split in half several months ago it seems as if my subdomain is struggling to get back up.We all know that Google, the internet master, prefers niches sites over...
by Scott Bateman4 weeks ago
I received an email that a new Hub is "eligible" for a niche site. But it suggests I need to proofread it before it can move over. I edited the article for readability and ran it through a spelling and grammar...
by Sakina Nasir2 weeks ago
Hi everyone! I have written the following hub recently. Does it stand a chance of getting selected? I still have 6 more days left after which I can submit this hub. Please read and tell me what you think of it. Your...
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.