It is clear that many authors use different strategies to try to make their hubs successful.
Many use different techniques within a sub and between mini-subs. Its a changing feast.
It is very hard to understand what works.
HP already compiles data for each page that is displayed in the 'stat' for each page:
# Word Count
# Revenue Potential
# Incoming Links
# View Duration
# First Published
# Page Views (by date)
# Traffic Sources (by date)
What is missing from this is:
# layout options the author uses ( full width image at the top, video, poll, image and ad placements)
# number of hubs in the sub and how tightly focused it is
# social media links
# interlinking between related hubs
# external links generated by the author
# organic links that develop naturally
# other promotional activities
# number of comments
# web analytics data
# PR rank
With this information authors could get a better idea of what works and what doesn't especially if they could see the results for strategies adopted by other authors.
What I suggest is that HP set up a voluntary 'Track a Hub' system. Authors could nominate new hubs to be included. They would enter layout summaries and their promotional efforts on a form for a database. This information would be combined with data HP already keeps for each hub on the 'stats' page, which would be expanded to provide additional reports on various tactics. Uses could see their own data for nominated hubs and see summaries for hubs that other uses have anonymously added to a pool.
The aim of this would be to define a 'Pathway to Success'
Incidentally I don't understand why HP doesn't make better use of the statistics it already compiles to provide reports to the community on various correlations.
This could be done external to HP if people were interested.
I like this idea. Frankly, I still haven't figured out Google Analytics. Even though I've figured out a few things that work for me, it would be nice to know more. There's a lot of outdated info on hub pages that makes writers crazy, but if HP would create some sort of analytical tool that we could access that is more user friendly than Analytics, it would be great.
This sounds like a great idea. I myself am rather interested in the stats on the interlinking hubs, especialy whether contextual links or a link capsule works better. I personally haven't seen much of a difference between the two. Seeing real time data on the issue would be a great value to all of us writers.
by iamalegend7 years ago
is commenting on hubs a smart traffic strategy
by Sima Ballinger7 years ago
My traffic is rising on one of my articles, what should I do?
by Victoria Lynn6 years ago
I've seen people saying that they are writing longer hubs and getting more traffic. I've always heard at least 300 words up to 800 or so. Have you found an optimal number to shoot for?
by Jerrico Usher9 years ago
My new experiment:http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/8289is looking better every day, and in fact I am trying to figure out ways to help as many Huber’s as possible in this path so I decided I'm going to develop my site...
by Daisy Mariposa5 years ago
Why don't some authors take the time to check the facts in their Hubs before publishing them?I've read several Hubs that contain information that is incorrect. Those authors that don't check the facts in their articles...
by onenewbrazil6 years ago
What is your strategy on getting high-quality organic traffic?
Copyright © 2018 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.