Introducing Idle Hubs

Jump to Last Post 151-200 of 295 discussions (1259 posts)

83
psycheskinnerposted 11 years ago
The difference here is that a de-indexed hub is almost certain not to recover. That is why i find this new approach alarming as anything that gets quiet for a while could effectively get killed.

And if someone has a different income stream to the rest fo us, that does strike me as a relevant point to make. Minus all the personal stuff.

Trust does not just have the settings of 'yes' and 'no'. There are degrees.
report
1. 86
  Marisa Wrightposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Absolutely right. If something is de-indexed, it loses all its age and has to start again. HubPages is always telling us how important age is - "Hubs take time to mature".
  report
  85
  IzzyMposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I think that mature thing is out the window. As you know, I have started several new subdomains, and between them they get a lot more traffic than my 'mature' hubs.
  
  Now I know you all know that my subdomain got well-skelped so is perhaps not the best analogy out there, but there are writers here whose 'mature' hubs seem to have lost their maturation and so they are suffering catastrophic losses in traffic.
  
  Paul E said something about hubs coming out of sleep mode and regaining their initial rankings. He didn't give us a time-frame, more's the pity.
  
  But remember that all hubs will have a publication date, even if later they get no-indexed for whatever reason.
  
  That must count for something.
  
  By the way, my traffic, what remains of it, is in freefall just now
  report
  86
  Marisa Wrightposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  As you say, if a 'mature' account gets Panda'd/sandboxed like yours did, maturity counts for nothing - so it's not a good analogy. Outside HubPages, maturity still counts for something in Google's eyes, and I don't believe HubPages is so very different.
  report
  87
  Will Apseposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  You never tried getting rid of your under-performing pages, Izzy. There is no guarantee that doing so would lift Panda but if you don't try you will never know.
  
  I won't be taking too much notice of the on-idle feature on my account (I have no idled hubs anyway) because I prefer to make my own judgments about which pages are a liability and I am a lot more ruthless than HP's algo.
  report
  85
  IzzyMposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Actually, I did.
  
  I have deleted and removed more than 100 articles from this account, and have unpublished many more at various times, before leaving them idle for a while, not seeing a change, and re-instating them.
  
  I have also edited and improved every single hub -added extra paragraphs, reduced keyword usage, re-focussed, re-titled and still Google traffic never came back.
  
  All the ones that are zzeed were last updated in May/June of this year.
  
  BUT, brand new articles on other subdomains that have no age are doing well, not all of them, but some of them are doing far better than those on this account ever did.
  
  Applying what I have learned from building this account to new subs shows it is possible for new hubs to do really well from day 1 - though I suppose it'll be from day 2 from now on, seeing new hubs get a 24 hour probationary period where they are hidden from the search engines.
  report
  87
  Will Apseposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I would let the on idle pages go. See if it helps.You have to think wolf pack. Any feeble members need to be driven out into the ice so the rest have a chance. I have killed off about a third of my pages. And I spend at least two days on every page and more on some. Its the pack that matters not that sad eyed cub with the limp.
  report
  85
  IzzyMposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Well I am totally ignoring them. There is no point in updating them further as they don't get traffic.
  
  I am hopeful that this new change on HP will work, in which case my traffic will come back in force to those hubs that have enjoyed a continued but limited success.
  
  What I do with them after that is a 'wait and see' scenario.
  
  Once they are de-indexed, I can do what I like with them, once I have chased down all their copies out there.
  report
  95
  PaulGoodman67posted 11 years agoin reply to this
  "...think wolf pack. Any feeble members need to be driven out into the ice..." Also, the previous "like the Retreat from Moscow..."
  
  Enjoying the recent lyricism in your metaphors, Will!
  
  I think I am going to wait a little and see what effects the Zzz change has on traffic (until the next Panda update?) before I do any more serious work on my hubs - partly because I am getting more joy from work done elsewhere, but also because it might be easier to estimate how much of the problems are personal, and how much are site-wide. Most of the writers in the Success Stories seem to have strong material but are suffering like many of the rest of us. I agree generally though, that there is an increasing need to be brutal, as far as pleasing Google seems to be concerned...
  
  (I had half a dozen Zzzs, by the way, but they were mainly on my smaller HP accounts - I was surprised that I had any, to be honest.)
  report
  87
  Will Apseposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I reckon that the problem for Hubpages is just how brutal they get with under-performing pages. If they don't get brutal enough they won't be saving many accounts from Panda. If they get too brutal, they will be upsetting too many writers.
  
  I developed a deep loathing for Squidoo because of their absurd policies in regard to updates and deleting pages and I won't write there again- even though I can see the logic of their position. You upset someone enough and logic does not matter.
  
  Hopefully, HP will monitor the number of accounts getting Panda hits and plot it against the degree of rigor in sending pages into idle mode and come up with some kind of balance.
  
  I would like to be persuaded by a nice graph showing a decline in Panda hits following this new feature.
  report
  95
  PaulGoodman67posted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Well, as I've criticised HP in the past for not being tough enough, I think it would be hypocritical for me if I didn't offer them general support when they moved in that direction.
  
  Of course, people can and should raise their problems regarding the changes. But I do wonder in some cases if some people understand the background (Google Panda etc) and why HP are making the changes? Maybe HP haven't explained it well enough?
  
  For instance, agreeing with the Zzzs, but demanding that there should be an opt-out for individual hubbers is a bit like saying that you agree with a rule that drivers should have to stop at a red traffic light, but they should also be able to opt out of the rule if they choose. Some things, if they are going to work, are all or nothing and they just don't work if there's an opt-out!
  
  I like Squidoo now - but it took me a long time to like it. I still prefer Hubpages, at least in theory, but I wish I could get back some of the traffic and earnings again...
  
  Whatever the dissenters say, HP is also much more open and inclusive than any of its major rivals. I would be more than happy for them to remain widely inclusive in terms of what they have indexed, but Google are pressurising them to tighten up and HP just can't afford to ignore that.
  
  Plus, some of us have been in the doldrums for months and we are grateful for any move that might help us!
  report
69
thisisoliposted 11 years ago
for the record most of the hot hubs on my profile are not particularly great performers.
report
0
Arlene V. Pomaposted 11 years ago
My views have remained the same, and everything is marked by green dots. If I get a Zzz, I'll fix it. So as far as more changes--they are constant on this site (announced or unannounced), and I'm tired of playing the happy camper and going with it. I don't spend as much time here as I used to because of all this. If you haven't already, I'm sure you've wandered off to greener pastures that don't make a habit of dumping their "new and improved" stuff on you. It would be nice to be left alone so that you could do just straight writing.
report
74
LetitiaFTposted 11 years ago
Oh dear. I wasn't concerned but that's because I misread the learning center! I thought the pending was for new hubs AND a warning that you'd get Zz'd if you didn't act fast to revive an ailing hub. I guess it was wishful thinking on my part. Didn't realize it went idle directly.
Still, I'm sure the HP team is not taking uncalculated risks. They are the the ones who keep abreast of Google's fickle behavior and who are best placed to protect the general good of the HubPages community as a whole, of which we all, they and we, are a part. Which doesn't keep us from airing our opinions (which they've asked for) and working with them on it...
report
65
2uesdayposted 11 years ago
Quote from the blog linked in the original posting here -

"This update is just the first version of many to come. Figuring out how to best protect Hubbers’ reputations and improve the overall quality of Hubs will aid their chances of success. We are confident that this first step is a very positive one! We hope you take this as a convenient opportunity to do some spring cleaning amongst your Hubs – and that you enjoy more traffic as a result."

Is that spring cleaning as in updating (dusting) or as in unpublish it (throw out or send to a new home)?
I thought it meant to first one but the more I read the more confusing it becomes.

I do not understand the bit about idle not being unhealthy either.
report
1. 74
  Horatio Plotposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Spring cleaning means moving a picture round a bit, adding a poll or two, slipping in a quiz and generally dusting it down and getting it all spick and span for Big G .
  
  ....Oh and then don't forget to get all hot under the collar and start mumbling about HP,"infringing my artistic integrity", as you press the "done editing" button.
  
  Horatio
  x
  report
0
Arlene V. Pomaposted 11 years ago
Hey, I can live with this new feature, just like the other ones introduced in the past. Is there a choice? As for my HubPages account? I'm leaving that open so I can visit and publish a Hub or two or three. I don't mind reading what other writers think of this new feature, and I can appreciate all of the input. But for me, the green dots and the Zzz are just another thang in the many Executive Decisions to come. For this retired person, it reminds one of being at work. LOL! If these Zzz's keep reminding me to check my flock, I'll do it! I must say that I am proud of my hack job on my Hubs before establishing my profile.
report
82
Mark Ewbieposted 11 years ago
OK, this is interesting.

Another Zzzz - this time against a page I created only two months ago. It's not great quality - just some words and pictures - hmmm, that's what I do.

It's not very long, just under 700 words.

Had one or two Google hits and one or two Pinterest ones.

It forms part of my portfolio of humorous bits of nonsense. If people read it they might have a brief chuckle.

Is it worth keeping, tweaking... im.. prov.. ing?

I honestly don't know. Thing is that if the timescale is so short I'm going to be on a perpetual cycle of tweaks just to maintain a pointless Google ranking.

In my opinion it would be good enough for a throwaway article in a magazine, a funny column piece or something.

I'm going to have to have a long think.

edit: 12 visits in 7 days.
report
1. 85
  aa liteposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I would leave it as it is, and see whether you can't get more hits from Pinterest on it. Or maybe stumbleupon, reddit. If it is humourous, it sounds more like something that would work there, rather than in Google.
  
  Even if you kept tweaking it, and kept it awake, would you get enough Google hits on it to justify the effort. I reckon 10 views translate to 2-6 cents in HP Adwords.
  report
  82
  Mark Ewbieposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Well, I've been banned from Reddit. Posting, sharing, submitting your own stuff... imo... is a waste of time. It needs a visit, and a natural share from someone who genuinely enjoyed it. That's my angle on traffic.
  
  I need better keyword titles and a keener marketing sense.
  
  5 cents a day is 15 dollars a year. It's all money.
  report
96
Glenn Stokposted 11 years ago
Okay here are my thoughts on the matter.

I had 13 ZZZ's and in the last 48 hours I had updated and modified 10 of them. As of today only one is left with the circle arrows. But that should clear up soon as I noticed all modified hubs with ZZZ's go into that mode for about 24 hours.

As for the other three that I did not update, since Google has indicated in their webmaster blog that eliminating low quality hubs can help improve ranking on the rest, I chose to leave them in idle mode in order to help my other hubs.

Google can't tell the difference between low-quality and low-traffic. But that's the world we live in and it's best to work with it.

I've been deleting low-traffic hubs over the past several months and I think it's good that we now have a solution to hide these from Google without actually deleting them. So we have the best of both worlds and, according to Google, should help improve ranking on our other Hubs.

I'll be monitoring my stats to see how this works out.
report
1. 57
  Alternative Primeposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Therein lies the absurdity, and possibly even illegality of this "De-Listing" fiasco.
  
  In my opinion, there is a very good reason why search cannot distinguish, nor is it programmed to detect a connection between "Low Quality" hubs and "Low Traffic" hubs, and that reason is crystal clear, because there is no inherent direct correlation between the two, no link to be found - Anyone who has been in this business for even a moderate length of time understands this basic fact.
  
  If you lock a DaVinci in a safe where nobody ever sees it again, does it continue to retain "Masterpiece" status? Does it still maintain intrinsic value?
  
  So after understanding this fundamental bit of info, why is HP attempting to make this ludicrously flawed connection and taking such drastic measures by unilaterally 'Axing" low traffic hubs, a strategy which has absolutely nothing to do with actually cleaning up and ensuring quality? Neglecting to give members adequate notice as a common courtesy gesture only adds insult to injury in this unfortunate circumstance -
  
  It's obvious, this is a "Hail Mary" experimental attempt at the expense of members period - Resources, for whatever reason, will not be spent in an effort to peruse each individual hub to detect what they deem as "Quality Violations", - So in an effort to save time and money, an arbitrary blanket sweep to eliminate perfectly good hubs with the high hope of getting "Lucky" and hitting the jackpot is the primary motivation here -
  
  Furthermore, how do we know the downward adjustment in views the site is experiencing overall is not simply the result of "Natural Progression" as more writers and web sites enter the online arena to compete for attention? In that case, what was once a huge, generous fleeting windfall might actually turn into a justified, more realistic norm -
  
  Although I'm livid with this turn of events, I'm also pleased to see managing HP employees are present here in this forum so they can read first hand all comments including mine for what they think they are worth - I've always been a straight shooter and will continue to articulate as such regardless of "Popularity" aspects -
  
  When you put as much work into creating quality work such as many of us do here, it's insane to think your contributions can, and will be subjected to arbitrary, unilateral "De-Listing" without notice, and without cause -
  report
  78
  Sally's Troveposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I don't know what HP is doing, but it's not unilaterally axing low traffic hubs. I have plenty of low traffic hubs, none of which but one were put in the zzzzs. The one that got axed was a trendy topic, good for the royal wedding in 2011 and not much else. I'm only one little peon here, but if HP were axing all low traffic hubs, 15% of mine (minimum) should have been zzzzd for failing to generate 15 visits in a month or even one visit in a week.
  report
  57
  Alternative Primeposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  A) The action is definitely "Unilateral" without consent of respective members - To my knowledge there was no debate, conversation etc. -
  
  B) They are indeed "Axing" perfectly good work from pre-established positions in "Search" -
  
  C) The claims suggest the de-listing of only "Low Traffic" hubs -
  
  If you're experiencing something different Sally, I guess it's more "Arbitrary" than we were led to believe -
  
  Do you actually approve of HP unilaterally & arbitrarily "De-Listing" any or all of your hubs? Personally, I've worked way too hard for that to happen -
  report
  78
  Sally's Troveposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  No, I don't "approve." However, HP is the business owner and I can go along with their terms or not. That's my choice. Hope that answers your question.
  report
  57
  tussinposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  It's not even close to being illegal. Ill-conceived, yes. Unlawful, no.
  
  They own the site and you own your content. People are allowed and many probably will move their zzzed articles to other sites. And that will be HP's loss since they rely on a faulty algorithm to distinguish between high and low quality.
  report
  57
  Alternative Primeposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  tussin,
  
  I really don't have the time to engage in a lengthy legal discussion, however, as a member of HP, each individual builds up a certain degree of "Good Will" during the course of publishing articles - Good Will which is enhanced by outside sources despite traffic size -
  
  Therefore, regardless of who "Owns" the site, and that is also an item which could be debated, any deliberate actions which impede the progress of, and or erode said "Good Will" can indeed be challenged -
  
  BTW - If all laws and or policies were "Black & White" "Cut & Dry" there would be no need for juris prudence right? - Bottom line, you're entitled to your legal opinion and I mine -
  report
  91
  Greensleeves Hubsposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Very much with you on much of this issue Alternative Prime - particularly the absence of any connection between 'low quality' and 'low traffic'. I suspect some who have made the connection before, or who have described 'underperforming hubs' as being 'stale' or used other derogatory terms, may now be regretting that. At least if de-listing stays in place in its current form, let it be made clear in every post that it is 'low traffic' which is being penalised - nothing else, and certainly nothing to do with quality. (of course poor quality can lead to low traffic, but low traffic can occur for a multitude of reasons in beautifully written, highly informative and well presented hubs).
  
  An aspect which is increasingly annoying me, is that even if one accepts the de-listing of hubs from Google in order to raise the standing of Hubpages, why is it necessary for HubPages to remove hubs from the Topics categories on its own site? These are purely used internally by hubbers, NOT by Google searchers, so have nothing to do with the reputation of HubPages on Google. By removing de-listed hubs from the Topics category and effectively making the hubs invisible to everyone - not just Google searchers but also hubbers - all possibility of promoting these hubs (as I have tried to do in some recent reviews) is taken away, because it becomes impossible even for HubPage members like me to locate the hubs.
  report
72
brakel2posted 11 years ago
A letter came from Google a while back asking staff to update site with good quality articles. I believe it happened in late June. Paul E wrote a hub and included the substance of the letter. Staff was to inform them when completed. This must be a part of that plan.
report
69
thisisoliposted 11 years ago
"Google can't tell the difference between low-quality and low-traffic. But that's the world we live in and it's best to work with it. " Yes it can, it's Hubpages that can't.
report
1. 85
  aa liteposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Exactly, Google algorithm tries to detect low quality, not always very well. When Google thinks a site is low quality, low traffic results.
  
  HubPages doesn't have Google's resources to detect low quality, and nobody knows exactly how Google's algorithms work, it's a trade secret, and anyway the algorithms are changing all the time. Therefore HubPages takes low Google traffic as an indication of low quaility, and combined with its own quality algorithm, decides which hubs to make idle.
  
  I'm not saying that I think this is a perfect solution, but just out of interest, what would you suggest that HubPages do? Have a human go through each hub, all 1.3 million of them to decide which ones should be delisted?
  report
  57
  tussinposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Other sites use humans to moderate a user's first several submissions to ensure that the user submits quality work and to deter them from submitting substandard work even after they are clear. HP could have done something like that a long time ago, but they were lazy and didn't want to expend the extra effort to vet all the new sign-ups.
  
  The size of the site's library of articles is a poor excuse for having zero quality control when it mattered most. If HP didn't have the man power or technological resources to accurately assess quality, then it should not have let articles proliferate unchecked. Now it's left with a mass of unsorted articles and it has no quick and easy way of telling which are good and which are bad. The "best" metric they have is traffic, which as everyone with a brain has pointed out, is a pretty crude metric from which to judge quality. HP's problems are entirely its own fault.
  report
  91
  Greensleeves Hubsposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I suspect aa lite is right in much of what is said here. I just wish and hope that in future, the distinction is made absolutely clear by HubPages that if hubs are delisted using the present methodology, they are delisted purely because of lack of traffic NOT lack of quality. The implication which has unfortunately been made many times that these hubs lack quality - tho' true in some cases - is certainly not true in many, and may then come across as deeply insulting.
  
  Of course as you say, it is not feasible that Hubpages staff should go through every hub manually to decide on which should be delisted. But at least if there was some warnings before delisting, some kind of appeals process, or some taking into account the hubscores and other criteria besides traffic figures, then this would be better than a very arbitrary delisting based on traffic.
  
  Interesting thoughts tho'. By the way, I like the look of your frog hubs!!
  report
  57
  Alternative Primeposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  aa lite,
  
  It's the worst solution imaginable and they are absolutely audaciously over extending their authority in my opinion -
  
  If a connection between "Quality" and "Traffic" cannot be established, which it never will be by rational, logical minded individuals, how can you possibly come up with a strategy that connects the two and systematically proceeds to tear down pre-established good will?? It's unbelievably absurd -
  
  Just because you either do not possess the assets and or fail to allocate resources toward a legitimate way to ensure site wide quality, doesn't mean you have the automatic right to default and start grasping a straws then pray with both hands clasped that your high risk venture is proven to be fortuitously correct sometime in the future -
  
  What happened to the experimental 'Page Layout" which was supposed to save the universe? Sorry MickiS, although I would place substantial assets in the column that asserts you are an extremely intelligent individual, what would you expect me to say?
  report
  69
  thisisoliposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Causation not correlation - There are plenty of reasons a hub may get low traffic, just because not much traffic is being delivered doesn't necessarily mean Google thinks it is low quality.
  
  Also - Looking at examples, my Hubpages Sucks page has been put to sleep, despite the fact that it has huge social interaction and regular traffic leading to it. - another example, also kind of an interesting one.
  
  The simple argument here is that if Hubpages is going to keep implementing these quality rules, they should stop claiming they are to help people in terms of organic traffic, because a lot of the moves they have made have if anything had an adverse affect on SEO. The idea of deindexing hubs based on traffic is absurd, and it holds the high possibility of de-indexing quality content in the eyes of Google because of low traffic.
  
  Remember - Google is not some mystical source of traffic, it comes down to people searching and clicking. If people are not searching, there are no clicks, even if you are ranking well.
  
  That means the article still can add domain value to your hub portfolio and backlinks, it also means that if traffic does arise, be it from a new product (See my earlier 'Tron' example, it could be a high value rare shared term, I know at least three people now who have sold high end, 6 figure, sports cars through Hubpages. I can guarantee that the sales didnt come from 1,000 daily visitors looking for "where to buy a Ferrari online."
  
  I re-iterate. while low traffic can be a symptom of low quality, it is not a reliable indicator of quality.
  
  From what I see here, traffic is not the only indicator here, but it is a major one, and that is a huge flaw.
  report
  57
  Alternative Primeposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Although I would assert both "Causation" & "Correlation" would apply in the context of my comment, I couldn't agree more with the balance of your statement which highlights and emphasizes common sense aspects which all experts in the literary and artistic fields understand to be factual -
  report
  86
  Marisa Wrightposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  +1
  report
  85
  aa liteposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Thisisoli, I actually never said that low traffic indicated low quality. I said that Low quality (as defined by Google) results in low traffic. I absolutely agree that there could be reasons for low traffic other than low quality. I suspect HubPages staff understand that as well, even if they will stick to the line that the idle hubs 'need more work'.
  
  The problem is identifying whatever it is on this site that Google doesn't like (Google low quality), because the Panda slaps the whole site because of some bad content. HubPages doesn't know how to identify which, of the 1.3 million hubs are causing the problem, I'm sure if they did they would have done it a long time ago. So they've taken this shortcut, and anything that doesn't get Google traffic is in danger of getting zzeed because it might be getting a Google penalty. Hubs that get the occasional punter from Google, presumably are not hated by it.
  
  I am sure that they realise that this will hit some good hubs, as well as the bad ones and that it is far from a perfect solution, but I guess they think it is the best they can come up with. When dealing with huge numbers, and computer algorithms to judge quality, you can hardly expect great finesse.
  
  They would probably reason, that the 'collateral damage' good hubs are not getting traffic from Google anyway, so de-indexing them is not going to affect them much. For example if your 'HubPages Sucks' page is getting a lot of social traffic, then it should continue to get it, even if it got the sleeping potion.
  
  Incidentally I don't think this is done purely on the basis of Google traffic, I think there is a 'quality element' in HP's algorithm as well. But I'm pretty sure that a hub that gets daily Google traffic will not be considered 'low quality' no matter what humans thought of it. If Google is sending it a lot of traffic, then obviously it is not offending Google's algorithms.
  
  I am sure many people can come up with individual examples of hubs that were Zzeed, where there was a high value rare shared item, and it was a mistake to lose it. But remember we are dealing with 1.3 milion hubs, a few examples were HubPages loses money by idling hubs will not matter (to them), if overall this improves traffic. The good of the many.......
  
  @Alternative Prime, have you read GreekGeek's hubs on the subject? Squidoo has been doing something similar, 'idling' lenses that fall below a certain lensrank, and it didn't get slapped by Panda, last year. So there is a precedent for doing this, that seems to have worked.
  report
72
brakel2posted 11 years ago
Why can't google distinguish between low traffic and low quality or is this being facetious? I still believe if a hub has some traffic and good quality it won't go idle. Does anyone have an excellent quality hub that went idle regardless of traffic?
report
72
brakel2posted 11 years ago
Believe Sally. She has proof
report
82
Mark Ewbieposted 11 years ago
If we start trying to define quality this will be the longest thread in history.
report
1. 91
  Greensleeves Hubsposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Ah but Mark, if it becomes the longest thread in history at least it will mean that it has a lot of traffic, and as we all now know, if something has a lot of traffic, then it must have a lot of quality too
  report
83
psycheskinnerposted 11 years ago
In the content writing game "traffic" is IMHO pretty much the only "quality" that matters. We are, after all, funded by Adsense et al, not the Arts Council.
report
1. 82
  Mark Ewbieposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  lol - fair point
  report
78
Sally's Troveposted 11 years ago
I think I know what a good quality hub is here, according to HP. And it's no secret. Just follow the learning center advice (mouse over your own name at the top of the page then click learning center). Yes, you'll have to read through a lot of stuff, some of which needs to be updated, but the overall message is clear...

1. Write what you know (don't spin crap you've found elsewhere)
2. Focus on evergreen content (stuff that's useful over time, not trendy garbage)
3. Make use of the HP capsules to present or embellish your information in different ways (tables, videos, photos) for the sake of reaching people who absorb information in different ways
4. DELIVER what your title PROMISES
5. Be merciless about grammar, spelling, and punctuation accuracy, because these are the mechanics of language that let you get your point across and also make you believable, as in, an authority

That's my take on it. There are countless forum posts and official HP blog posts talking about these things. Get involved in all of them and pay attention.
report
1. 57
  Alternative Primeposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Sally,
  
  The problem or primary "Flaw" is that HP is trying to link "Quality" with "Views" which is at an equal level of absurdity as trying to link "Shares" with "Quality" -
  
  If you're a professional in the field of writing, you understand there is no connection and really no debate as to the reason why -
  
  Moreover, even if you follow HP's prescription for a "Quality" article which is also a debatable formula, without a little luck, there is no guarantee it will realize abundant views, which means it can inevitably be subjected to "De-Listing" -
  
  Quite the incentive to spend the necessary time and effort to create a quality piece wouldn't you say? -
  report
  78
  Sally's Troveposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Look, AP, I'm not missing your point. But you don't know what HP is trying to do (except make its business grow, or save it) any more than I do. You can speculate all you want, so can the rest of us, and guess what? HP is getting a world of great advice from its members, for free!
  report
  74
  LetitiaFTposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I've been thinking the same, Sally. There's a lot of conjecture over what HP is doing, but truth is, none of us commenting here knows for sure what criteria HP has based its algorithms on. We can only assume (and hope and pray) they do!
  report
  53
  janderson99posted 11 years agoin reply to this
  There are two separate test 1) traffic and 2) quality.
  This reply from HP was on page 2 of the forum
  "Yes, there is a quality component to this. Most of that happens during the 24 hr pending period. You won't necessarily see your Hub in the Z state because we try and be a bit more helpful with new and updated Hubs with the explanations. This isn't new. We've been enforcing quality for a long time. There is more focus on new Hubs now as we get caught up with the backlog."
  So all this argument about equating traffic with quality is irrelevant.
  => ZZZZZ applies if the article fails what HP regards as below quality standards
  => ZZZZZ applies if the traffic is below the minimum number.
  => ZZZZZ applies if the article is stale, out of date or hasn't been updated recently (this is an extra one which I have deduced from my ZZZZ revivals)
  In my experience you can get the Prince to kiss the sleeping beauties and awaken them (even the ones with low traffic for now) with a couple of tweaks (add a new image, poll, extra text, interlinks etc.). All my 12 ZZZZ which I did not delete were revived in this way.
  report
  74
  LetitiaFTposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Yes but...
  Is quality solely determined by the factors menntioned by Sally? Are they all taken into account? What traffic frequency & periodicity are determinant? On what criteria is a hub considered stale or outdated if it's still getting traffic and ranking, which appears to be the case from the some of the comments.
  I assume one factor has to be not just traffic, but google search frequency, which will impact narrow niches, which is a real drag.
  report
85
Azure11posted 11 years ago
Have I missed anyone saying anything positive about this change yet?!

So amongst the (quite a few) Zzz'd hubs that I have, one has a hubscore of 80 - how can this correlate with being withdrawn from public viewing - it's either worth and 80 (and I would say by that score worth seeing) or it isn't.

I'm OK with tweaking some of these hubs but I'm still not happy that some of my summaries of old events are getting Zzz'd - just because something happened in 2010 doesn't mean that people might not search for it years later - or maybe no-one searches for historical events...
report
1. 78
  Sally's Troveposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Hubscore means nothing.
  report
  83
  psycheskinnerposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Zzz may not mean a lot either, except as a warning that something that means nothing is about to get one's hub de-indexed.
  report
  78
  Sally's Troveposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Right you are. I think you just put everything in the right perspective.
  report
2. 57
  Alternative Primeposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Just curious Azure11,
  
  How do you even know what to tweak?
  
  And if there's nothing to tweak on a quality entry, then what?
  report
  75
  carol7777posted 11 years agoin reply to this
  That is a good question..How can we be sure what we need to do...
  report
  53
  janderson99posted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Try adding an extra image or two (Pinterest them), RSS, a poll and a few interlinks with other hubs (5 mins work) - Worked for me and increased chance of traffic in the future. Also provides an update that will keep the Grin Reaper away for a while.
  Just play the game - there are no rules - just tweak away - reset the update clock
  report
  75
  carol7777posted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks for sharing all this. Very helpful. I haven't had any zzzs and I am not sure why..However, I am always tweaking, but mostly seem to have trouble with titles. Some recipes get huge response...I do check keywords. Anyway as I am rambling here. I appreciate your suggestions and will follow.
  report
  85
  Azure11posted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Well I just reword some stuff, add a few sentences and maybe shift some of the capsules around - enough to make a kind of decent amount of change to the hub but not really changing the actual content and feel. There is always something you can tweak (even if you don't want to!) apart from I would say maybe poetry or creative writing.
  
  I'm only really doing this on hubs that I feel should not be idle and have some merit, others I may just leave. However a bunch of my Zzz's are about hubpages and would probably not interest Google users so I'll just leave those as they are.
  report
85
IzzyMposted 11 years ago
I've just noticed one of my zeed hubs is getting hits from Yahoo (noted on Analytics Real Time).

Does this mean the no-index tag only affects Google traffic?
report
1. 76
  Kangaroo_Jaseposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I am about to ask this and a bunch of other questions further in this forum IzzyM.
  report
85
rebekahELLEposted 11 years ago
I don't like the de-indexing of hubs that are on our subdomains. I haven't read through this entire thread, but read much of it, plus the learning center, and GG's hub. Did I miss somewhere where it states what algorithm is used to identify a hub destined for 'idle' status? Shouldn't that be the hubber's choice? I see hubbers deleting hubs, wondering why their decent traffic hub is ZZZ'd. I would hate for HP to turn into a site where writers spend time researching, writing, formatting, publishing, etc., only to find hubs de-indexed because they don't receive enough traffic. ? Am I understanding this right?

I'm sure many of us have hubs written for a very specific audience which may not bring in continual traffic, but the traffic it does bring satisfies the viewer, or at least adequately answers the search query. These hubs have organic backlinks. Why would a hub like that get de-indexed?
report
1. 72
  brakel2posted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I think there is a misunderstanding about the deindexing. There are quite a few hubbers who have stated that the quality hubs which receive adequate traffic are staying. Mine that are not deindexed say that the hub shows vitality and has been indexed by google. If you hover your mouse over the little yellow line, it says that and various other things. I do not totally understand the process and understand how people feel. The zzzzs need to be worked on and then be back in the process as I understand it.. I have been reading some articles about deindexing, and it is supposed to be a good thing to help a site. I guess that we all hope that it works. I sure do.
  report
  69
  thisisoliposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  The fact that the hubs are not showing up in search results is mere evidence that they got hit by Google, not the Panda Update.
  report
2. 91
  Rock_njposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Another good point. HubPages created the subdomain format to avoid poorly performing Hubs (not necessarily poorly written Hubs) from affecting everyone who writes on Hub Pages. Now that each Hubber is walled off in their own subdomain , why can't HubPages leave it up to the Hubbers to decide which Hubs need to be updated or deleted, and let us run our own show. As it is set up now, what we do on our subdomain should not affect other Hubber's search rankings, so what is the point?
  report
  53
  janderson99posted 11 years agoin reply to this
  The subdomains are not completely independent because HP in their wisdom decided to hard-wire the articles in site maps via the topics, hot, latest etc. in the directory structure. Other sites with subdomains such as blogger don't have such a directory. This means that all the articles are linked together and vulnerable to the impact of poor quality articles. HP could change this by replacing the directory with internal search. IMO
  report
  87
  Will Apseposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  And dump most of the link juice in the process.
  report
85
rebekahELLEposted 11 years ago
I suppose that's partly what I'm talking about. What is the algorithm that indicates an idled hub. I think it would be helpful for writers to know if they don't want to end up with a ZZZ next to a hub that receives views from a specific type of audience.
All of my hubs have the featured dot. But if I saw that my very niche, Nick Gardner hub was idled, I wouldn't be happy. I'm sure others feel the same way about certain of their hubs.

I guess I'm also a little confused about why we changed to subdomains, if now our hubs are treated as affecting the whole of the HP domain.
report
72
brakel2posted 11 years ago
I know it's very confusing, and people are upset. James wrote some stuff above He's good. I believe him. He just had one negative comment. Let's hope for the best for all of us. We need to support each other. Thanks for responding Rebecca
report
72
brakel2posted 11 years ago
Sorry RebekahElle. For name
report
1. 85
  rebekahELLEposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Don't worry about it. I get called various names. RE is fine.
  report
91
Rock_njposted 11 years ago
Although I understand the intent of the Idle Hubs policy, there is a big unintended consequence that may hurt Hubbers. Some Hubs get active at certain times of the year or when certain news items are in the news and people are talking about them and searching for them. It is not unusual for me to see some of my Hubs idle for months, and then spring to life when the season they were written for comes (such as Hubs about buying and selling homes) or when what they were written about is in the news. For example, I wrote a Hub about how a major hurricane would affect New York City, and it just saw a surge of traffic since it's hurricane season and Isaac just hit a major city. People suddenly start searching for it and finding it (or not finding it if it is idled by Hub Pages one size fits all policy). How does Hub Pages propose to address this important negative side effect?

BTW, I searched for one of my "Idle Hubs" on Google, and it still showed up on the 2nd page. I guess it will take time for the deindexing to become effective.
report
1. 87
  Will Apseposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Perhaps you will need to nurse pages like this with an occasional update. As long we don't get put on a treadmill of remorseless and unnecessary updates of huge numbers of hubs, I think the occasional pages that needs a little special care is a reasonable price for the quality control.
  report
59
Norman Steinposted 11 years ago
+1

We have our own domains. Let us manage them.
report
91
Rock_njposted 11 years ago
Does this new Hub Pages idling policy affect our ability to create our own XML sitemap of our HP subdomain and then submitting it to Google for indexing? I assume it will index all of our Hubs, unless HP has done something that would prevent the idled hubs from showing up on the XML sitemap? Anyone?
report
1. 77
  MyWebsposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  You can submit your individual hubs or your subdomains XML sitemap until your blue in the face. If HP has Zzz'd your hub this also means it gets the 'no-index' attribute in the META tag. 'no-index' means Google will not include your hub in it's results. The sitemap changes nothing in this case. The XML sitemap just makes it easier for Google to find your content. Once they find it HP is saying to ignore this content, it's not worthy.
  report
  59
  Norman Steinposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  +1
  report
65
2uesdayposted 11 years ago
The conclusion I can draw from my own stats page is that when the poetry and creative writing hubs fall into the the idle status it is allocated on the basis of traffic and not topic. That is based on - the ones I had marked idle had not had as many visits.

I suspect that if I now were to publish something new it would probably never get off the starting blocks. Some of my hubs took a long time to get traffic from search.

What might be confusing the issue is that poetry can appear to be popular if there are a lot of on-site responses to it when it is first published. Which might not now help it long term, if the idle status is to do with incoming traffic. Just guessing and forming ideas about this, it is not based on any technical knowledge.

I have deleted the poems and stories marked idle and will place them on my own site or blogs. As I cannot see how my stories can be updated; they have a beginning a middle and an end. I am not too upset about moving them as I will use it as an opportunity to re-shape how and where I place my future writing.

At the point this was introduced my traffic was slowly climbing, I think from the new profile layout.Now today and yesterday it is slowly falling, not sure if it is related to the change or other factors. I had some stories that got a steady trickle rather than a torrent of readers from search so they might be causing the drop.

Really the way I feel now is that I will continue to leave my 'active' writing here and tweak what and when needs altering. This was my first place to publish on-line and it was a great place to pick up information about that. I can see HubPages is in a process of change and I hope eventually that it will benefit those who have spent hours creating their pages here.

The spread your work was good advice, as it gives a home to different types of writing. Blogs cost nothing and they work well in parallel to HubPages for me. As I get traffic going in both directions. I am resigned to the changes but this is not a resignation.
report
1. 81
  snakeslaneposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  That sounds like a good plan 2uesday. I unpublished all my Zzs. I'm not sure what I will do next.
  report
60
Xenonlitposted 11 years ago
I like the zzz as long as it is not an idle threat to delete my hard work! These are a good way to identify hubs that need to be updated and re marketed.
report
80
Bard of Elyposted 11 years ago
I have just had another discovery that has shown me this is not about quality of the hub or how long it is, how many original photos it has, or the layout or added videos, or, indeed, any of the things we are told make for a good hub. The hub I am talking about is about conspiracy theorist Benjamin Fulford and has no maps or quizzes, no polls. It even lost some of the videos it originally had because they became unpublished at YouTube and I couldn't be bothered looking for new ones. It is one of my weakest hubs with under 500 words, no original photos of mine, and in fact a hub I have sadly neglected because I am not proud of it, well, this hub is not in the Idle ranks!

So that tells me it has nothing to do with the amount of work you put in but is more about what people are looking for. This is all about traffic! If your hubs don't get enough then they get dumped in the idle bin. You could compose a work of literary genius here but if ho one was looking for the keywords in the title and you were not famous enough yourself so that people would seek it out, or had not told enough people to read it, then the chances are it too would be classed as idle!
report
1. 91
  Rock_njposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Bard, That is the crux of the problem with this Idle Hubs policy. It encourages writing "popular" Hubs, not necessarily well written ones that stand out above the rest. HubPages wants Hubs that get a lot of search engine traffic, and discourages Hubbers taking chances, taking the time to write a work of literary genius, writing about a poorly covered or obscure topic that is very interesting to some (but not wildly popular). This may ultimately drive more traffic to HubPages, as Hubbers will likely shy away from unpopular topics that will be thrown in the Idle Hubs jail and will instead focus on highly searched topics; however, overall this change will not improve the reputation of HubPages as a source of good information on the Internet. It could have the exact opposite effect, as people coming to HubPages only see mainstream topics and pop culture topics covered. HubPages may lose its uniqueness and just become another source of mainstream information. A dime a dozen. We'll see what happens. This certainly has me considering the options.
  report
  74
  Horatio Plotposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  So what's wrong with popular hubs?
  To turn around the argument that all the doubters are using here, you make the mistake that thinking popular hubs are low quality.
  I don't understand why you think a poorly covered or obscure topic has any more artistic merit than anything else or is likely to be better written. Please explain that to me?
  This is not a platform for literary genius. There are no literary geniuses here.
  report
  91
  Rock_njposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Nothing is "wrong" with popular Hubs. I was thrilled when the Hub I wrote about the Facebook IPO was getting 400 or 500 hits per day, and you're right that a Hub about a popular topic is not necessarily a reflection on how it is written. The point I am trying to make is a broader one. We all want our Hubs to be popular, but a platform like HubPages should also be a place where writers can take chances and publish unique content about topics far and wide, and this new policy runs contrary to that idea. There are other places on the Internet for those who wish to engage in this type of not necessarily popular writing, and from what I've read some of them are now in the process of leaving HubPages. There are some very good writers on HubPages. Who knows where the next piece of literary genius will come from. Why not HubPages?
  
  This is kind of like when rock music had its great years in the 1970s when artists were free to do what they wanted on a whole album. A lot of good (and bad) music came out of that artistic freedom. Then came MTV and the 3 minute video/song format in the 1980s that changed the music industry dramatically. Everyone had to go for that popular 3 minute hit to survive, instead of exploring their more artistic side. Sure, a lot of music was sold in this constrained format, but the overall quality of the art sufferred.
  report
  80
  Bard of Elyposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, indeed, gone are the days of amazing rock bands like Supertramp, Genesis, Emerson, Lake and Palmer, Jefferson Airplane, Grateful Dead, Yes, the Moody Blues, Jethro Tull, King Crimson, etc. Acts like that don't form and wouldn't stand much chance today if they did. The musicians were too good and played songs that were too long, or that is how it looks if we compare the music that has been popular for the past couple of decades.
  report
  74
  Horatio Plotposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  It doesn't run contrary to it at all, it simply helps it along. It doesn't stop anybody writing good quality Hubs about anything. How does it do that?
  I say it again, the line HP is setting is not hard to cross. Why have a piece of work sitting there, doing nothing? All they are saying is spruce it up
  Don't feel so persecuted, nobody's out to get anybody.
  By the way, while a lot of great music came out of the 70s, it did mean having a record contract with a major label, which wasn't easy to get. Now, any old herbert can make digital music in their bedroom with a computer, a piece of software and a ball of string. That's artistic freedom (though not a guarantee of quality!)
  Horatio
  report
  91
  Rock_njposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  The point is that good quality Hubs may not be popular enough under these guidelines, and may be thrown in jail. People will naturally stop writing unpopular hubs or find other places to publish them. My main beef with this Idle Hub policy is that I see some of my more obscure high quality Hubs sit idle for periods of time until the topic they are about is in the news, and then suddenly they get a traffic surge, but not if they are in HubPages jail. There are always upsides and downside to policy changes, and this is the main downside I am concerned with besides the overall effect on the variety of topics published on HubPages.
  report
  80
  Bard of Elyposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, I note that most of my conspiracy theory/ufology hubs are all still active. Over the years I have been moving away from a lot of that sort of material but now I can see that if I turn out hubs about Alex Jones, David Icke, the New World Order, Chemtrails, UFOs, Contactees etc that that is the sort of hubs wanted here even if I now think a lot of it is rubbish!
  report
  85
  aa liteposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I think you exaggerate about how popular a topic has to be to stay out of the 'idle bin'. Although I agree that traffic is one of the main factors that decides whether a hub is idled or not, you do not need a ton of traffic to stay indexed. Probably ten Google hits a month will do it.
  
  And actually it would be a bad idea for people to go after really popular topics, or celebrity gossip. Really popular topics have huge numbers of pages online written about them. There are commercial websites dedicated to celebrity gossip that have professional writers and photographers, and probably pay private investigators for phone hacking. Do you really think that a hub on HubPages will compete with them?
  
  I have a hub about the "giant waxy monkey tree frog", I think that would probably strike a lot of people as a fairly obscure topic. But there are a few people a day who type that keyword into Google, and more people who type phrases about the frog that my hub shows up for. So it gets clicked on a few times a day. It is hardly a hugely successful hub, but I am not expecting it to go idle any time soon.
  report
  74
  Horatio Plotposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  46 exact monthly searches, amazingly.
  There you go; obscure, niche, well written and odd.
  If the Monkey makes it, anything can.
  Horatio
  x
  report
81
mary615posted 11 years ago
I have been reading with interest, all the comments about this subject. I will add my opinion: My Hubs so far (2) that got ZZZed deserved it! They were lame poems I wrote way back when I first started. They are not worth anything to anybody, so I just deleted them. I have about 4 more pretty bad poems that will probably get the ZZZ's too.
I stopped trying to write poetry. I have an idea recipes will be next, and all these "tributes" Hubbers write about each other. Google doesn't care about these tributes, do you think? As far as recipes, it people want a recipe, they search Martha Stewart or elsewhere.
This is just my opinion.
I think this action on the part of HubPages is a good one.
report
1. 57
  Alternative Primeposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Hi mary615
  
  A) If you think the "De-Listed" hubs "Deserved" to be targeted why didn't you take proactive measures and "Ax" them yourself? We are all grown adults here with a few exceptions -
  
  B) Another common sense question - With an "Ax" looming over each new entry regardless of "Quality", how much time would you actually spend from this point forward on creating a hub if indeed you even decided to take the unnecessary risk? And how much time would you expect those who decide to assume the risk, to spent making a hub? Presumably much less time & effort will be exerted, and of course spending less time on creating future hubs will inevitable guarantee an overall "Quality" erosion of the entire site -
  
  C) The overriding point here is wether or not HP has the unilateral authority to "Pull the Plug" on hubs and erode "Good Will" - If you think that's acceptable, that's your right - I happen to disagree strongly and assert it's an ill-conceived strategy and there are legal components which need to be considered -
  report
  59
  Eric Graudinsposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Alternative Prime. It's clear that your head is so far up your bum that you haven't even read the terms of service under which you publish on this site.
  Here's Section 5. To which you have agreed to by publishing on this site.
  Just what part of it don't you understand?
  And please explain to the rest of us simpletons how is it illegal for hubpages to remove your work from search engine listing?
  
  And I think that you'll find a similar clause on EVERY content farm. As I have mentioned to you previously, if you were at all serious about this topic you would put your work on your own website.
  But it's much more fun for you to keep trolling here, isn't it :-)
  
  FROM HUBPAGES TERMS OF SERVICE:
  5. DISCONTINUATION OR MODIFICATION OF THE SERVICE
  
  HubPages reserves the right to modify or discontinue, temporarily or permanently, the Service or any portion thereof at any time, without liability to You or any third party. In addition, HubPages, in its sole discretion, may terminate Your password, account or use of or access to the Service (including Impression services as further described below), and remove and delete any Hubs or Content, for any reason.
  report
0
Arlene V. Pomaposted 11 years ago
Changed my profile and quit Hub Hopping. I don't write poetry because I hate it. I don't write book reviews, recipes or current events. I stay away from writing on subjects only of interest to Hubbers. I fixed my one Zzz, and now have green dots on my 100 Hubs that were hacked from 230. Anything else I need to do before taking a nap??? As my views take a nap??? Whatever, Boss. I'm on it!
report
1. 75
  jacharlessposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Wow, Arlene, you really went for the Espresso opt-in!
  Before a nap? Decaf herbal tea.
  
  James
  report
  0
  summerberrieposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Shhh...she is asleep, now!
  report
74
Reality Bytesposted 11 years ago
OK, published a hub two days ago, waited the 24 hrs for the hub to lose the swirly. Waited 24 more hours for Google to find it. 48 hrs later, no Google index, not even a HP index. I cannot find the hub on HP searching the exact title!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WTFUDGE!!!

I am done here until this is resolved!
report
85
Little two twoposted 11 years ago
I unpublished/deleted all hubs which were idled (shot dead) due to low traffic (not, NO traffic), though over the course of the hubs age, the traffic was growing though too slowly for hubpages preference. I took my niche articles that were spread out over a couple of articles due to amount of information needed to convey and rammed them into one big ugly, unappealing hub filled with unnecessary things like polls and videos and such. I went from 50 hubs to 11 or 12. I now have to spend so much time gaming the system and adding trivial aspects to my hubs, I no longer have time nor energy to support the other hubbers that I enjoy reading. My double digit pennies are a single digit penny a day now.

Someone mentioned to me that google is not going to appreciate all the new activity on my quiet slow growing hubs and may penalize me because google will see it as me boosting my own numbers or gaming them. I haven't seen google in days, whereas before they were fine with me.

I am going to back off Hubpages, log right out and let this miraculous new formula do its thing, let this experiment run it's course. Who knows maybe all this will improve things. But until I see that it does, I am not inclined to add new material.

Wish you all the best in your HP endeavors and may the hubpage hoops be visible to you for easy jumping, may google kiss your babies head and bless you with a spider or two.
report
1. 62
  CASE1WORKERposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I am not sure if this "idle" concept actually works. I have a hub with only a few views, although it does have some beautiful photos of my mums cat. Coming in I turn on anaytics and see that there is a view on it, Intrigued I check the source and find that it used suitable key words and was found via google-so are our "idle" hubs actually hidden from google as we have been told?
  report
74
Reality Bytesposted 11 years ago
Am I the only one not getting their new hubs indexed?
report
1. 82
  Mark Ewbieposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  You may be the only one writing new hubs...
  report
  74
  Reality Bytesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I have been working on this one for two weeks, it is supporting of my other works. I believe that the future will shine brightly on this hub, if anyone can find it!
  
  report
2. 94
  wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  A little early to tell, but I published one yesterday. G has found it, but not yet indexed it.
  
  Nor is it marked with the zzz thing; just the little green dot.
  report
  74
  Reality Bytesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I have the little green dot. It bothers me immensely that it cannot be found externally or internally! Is HP blocking Google from crawling this hub?
  
  edit: just checked Yahoo, not there either! Grrrrrrr!!!!!
  report
  94
  wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Go to WMT and ask G to index it. That has always worked well for me.
  report
  74
  Reality Bytesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Tried it, getting this message. Does this take time, first time I have tried to do this.
  
  Thank you for your help
  
  Data for http://reality-bytes dot hubpages.com/.........../ is not available
  report
74
Reality Bytesposted 11 years ago
Is there a way to check to see if a recently published hub that has not yet been found in searches will appear as duplicate if I unpublish and move it elsewhere?
report
1. 53
  janderson99posted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Three of my articles published in the last three days have been indexed. Sometimes it takes a while with G (several days even before the Idle). I think it is faster if you post links to social media sites + Pinterest and G+.
  report
  74
  Reality Bytesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  
  This would be the first time that my hub has not been indexed within a few hours.
  
  I am a little frustrated at this point. I am hesitant to provide any further work. Especially with no explanations from TPTB! I guess I will check back on Tuesday, if there is no resolution, I need a contingency plan. I think this is the impetus I need to acquire my own domain.
  
  I do appreciate the advice, it has been taken and followed.
  report
  0
  summerberrieposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I would be frustrated too. Wish I was more knowledgeable and could help, but can only offer my moral support.
  report
  74
  Reality Bytesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Thank You
  
  report
  0
  summerberrieposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I would be frustrated too. Wish I was more knowledgeable and could help, but can only offer my moral support.
  report
82
Danette Wattposted 11 years ago
Saw this in the weekly HP newsletter today:

While in an Idle state, the Hub will not be featured on HubPages Topic Pages or shown on related Hubs.

Wouldn't it make sense for them to show on related hubs so that if it's linked to one of our hubs that is getting good traffic, that one might get some good traffic too? Also noticed that the "link to this page" at the bottom of a 'sleeper' hub is missing. I thought that would give us an advantage of people use that link instead of just the URL at the top. Wouldn't that be an advantage to keep for us?
report
1. 75
  jacharlessposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  This is done because links within an Idle Hub effect both internal search and inbound-outbound links to the sub.domain and parent.domain. A Hub getting good traffic that is linked to an Idle Hub could lose traffic and search results traction. Especially if there are multiple links or multiple cross-Hub links pointing to or from.
  
  James.
  report
83
psycheskinnerposted 11 years ago
It does suggest that hubs go into Idle downhill and have to be dragged out again. it will not happen naturally if they become relevant again. Sounds like death to seasonal hubs.
report
1. 79
  Uninvited Writerposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I guess the new normal will be to go in a couple of months before and change something...
  report
85
internpeteposted 11 years ago
'Idle Hubs' is a great idea. I see a lot of poor content on hubpages all the time, and this seems to be a very good solution. Well done hubpages!

However, there is a problem.

Newly published hubs are being marked 'pending' for 24hrs after they are published. This means they are not indexed by search engines until 24hrs later.

They also don't have the 'link to this page' link at the bottom of the page.

This is a problem because it wastes 24hrs.

I do a fair amount of SEO/SMM in the first hour after publishing a hub, including submitting a link to Google and other search engines. I often get indexed by Google within 24hrs, and have sometimes received a fair amount of traffic in the first day from search engines, especially on current topics.

Now search engines don't recognize a hub until 24hrs after it has been published. This might not be an issue for most hubs that take time to show up on Google, but for current hot topics, this is a serious delay.

My suggestion is to either completely remove this 'pending' status for newly published hubs, or make it so verified hubbers (those who write good content/have no idle hubs or some other measure) don't have to sit through this pending period.

Hope this gets changed and thanks HP for all the hard work you do put in!
report
1. 74
  Reality Bytesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  
  And 24 hours after it comes out of idle, it is still not indexed! There has to be a glitch in the system, I have never waited this long to see my hub in Google!
  
  The "link to this page" is all the way at the bottom of the hub in the gray area.
  report
  85
  IzzyMposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Well I just tweeted and pinned it. That should help speed things up
  report
  74
  Reality Bytesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks IzzyM
  
  report
  85
  internpeteposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  the 'link to this page' link actually does not show up on my hubs that are 'pending'. It is there on all my others and I use it quite often when sharing my hubs on other sites.
  report
  74
  Reality Bytesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I did not realize that, it was pointed out to me only a few weeks ago.
  report
83
psycheskinnerposted 11 years ago
Sure new hubs should be given the benefit of the doubt?
report
85
DzyMsLizzyposted 11 years ago
Ugh!
First of all, it is unclear whether a "pending" status makes the hub entirely invisible to everyone, including other HP authors, or only to search engines.

Secondly, judging by others' comments here, I do hope that HP is NOT heading down the road of Demand Media Studios, in pre-selecting titles about which we are "allowed" to write, with no option for choosing our own topics. (And at DMS, that selection of titles is seriously flawed.)

As of now, my earnings are far higher than they've ever been at any time since I first initiated the AdSense program; that program, on its own, earned me not enough to bother mentioning, and I doubted living long enough to see the payout threshold. With the implementation of the HP Ad Program, I'm now at least making something every couple of months, and actually seeing payouts, and the totals are climbing, as well as the frequency.
Ergo, I'd like to stay here, after all the effort I've put in is finally starting to pay off. However, if we are going to be continually squeezed into box after box, and have our ability to choose what to write severely edited or compromised, I'll be gone.
It would behoove Hub Pages to remain true to its original vision, and stop trying to copycat other sites!
report
90
CyclingFitnessposted 11 years ago
I think we need some clear guidelines from hp on what exactly will lead to de-listing

-average views below a certain level might be a good place to start.

There's too many people inferring too many situations that we need a set of criteria to follow

I have hubs on first pages of google that get very little traffic as the search term isn't popular. However I may get months with a bit of a spike. They're some of my most informative and helpful hubs that I really want athletes to be able to see.
report
74
Reality Bytesposted 11 years ago
Could there be a chance that the reason that the search engines cannot find my latest hub is due to HP blocking the crawl? I tried to place a link to my latest hub within another hub on the same topic, using the insert/edit tool in edit mode, I cannot pull up my latest hub using the exact title! I cannot even find it on the site searching for the title!

report
1. 0
  summerberrieposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I could not find your hub but will this do?. Maybe turn this "fishy business" over to the HP tech team.
  
  report
  74
  Reality Bytesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah, maybe?
  
  What choice do I have?
  
  report
  53
  janderson99posted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Be patient. Wait a couple of days!
  report
  0
  Arlene V. Pomaposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Oh, gawd! Quit it! LMAO!!!
  report
72
Alastar Packerposted 11 years ago
Published a hub around 7.pm Tuesday- 72 hours as of now and it's still in pending. If the hub hadn't been +1'd and pinned suppose it wouldn't have been picked up by G at all; in addition it's a no show on topics and related hubs. Hope things can get straightened out soon for all of us.
report
76
Kangaroo_Jaseposted 11 years ago
QUESTION,

Will the 'no-index' tag on Zzz hubs only be affecting search on Google or other search engines as well?

Is deleting information from a Hub, going to be enough to send a flag for review to re-list a hub back into Google search? (as opposed to adding information as text, adding a quiz, adding a poll, updating the hub, etc)

Will we be advised as this process changes and evolves over time?
report
1. 53
  janderson99posted 11 years agoin reply to this
  http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/handling- … meta-tags/
  
  Any change appears to request the Grim Reaper to return.
  report
  76
  Kangaroo_Jaseposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks john,
  
  Was looking for this page, but had not found it.
  report
81
shibashakeposted 11 years ago
Given HPs traffic trajectory this year, it makes sense to focus on cleaning things out.

However, I am not sure why they choose to apply algorithms on a hub by hub basis, and totally ignore grouping by authorship. When I visit the author of spammy articles, they usually have many other spammy articles. For example, people who plagiarize content, usually do so across many of their hubs.

To me, it makes more sense to identify spammy authors rather than target individual hubs, with (seemingly) no attention given to authorship. Focusing on individual hubs will likely piss-off a lot of good writers, who are likely not contributing to the problem in the first place.

Google's new algorithms have a big component around authorship because people who have a track record of writing well, are not suddenly going to turn into spammy writers. It seems that HP would/should take a more author-centric rather than hub-centric view, when it comes to quality and getting back into Big G's good graces.
report
1. 76
  Kangaroo_Jaseposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  A huge part of this process will drop out the spammy writing from being found in Google search. This is a difficult and very time consum ing process already from doing it through Hub Hopping.
  
  I don't agree with the process of relying on an authorship component as I don't like my work being 'locked in' with a Google centric base for authorship and search.
  
  Whilst for many Google search is central for getting your written work found, it is NOT the only way.
  report
  81
  shibashakeposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Hmmm, not sure why you would feel locked-in. All I am saying is that a writer's track record on the site should be taken into account, before de-indexing.
  
  Writers are still free to create pseudonyms, multiple accounts, and/or put their work wherever they want.
  report
  76
  Kangaroo_Jaseposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Absolutely,
  
  Although much harder to build brand authority on Google with rel=author tag on those profiles. There is more to finding information that just Google alone.
  report
2. 91
  Greensleeves Hubsposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  shibashake; that seems like an immensely sensible suggestion. HubPages should be concentrating - if it is possible to do so - on low quality rather than low traffic.
  
  All hubbers will have some low traffic hubs, but there is a big difference between low traffic hubs due to poor quality on the one hand, and low traffic hubs due to minority interest content on the other:
  
  A quality hubber will almost always produce quality hubs, whilst a hubber who is content to churn something out in the space of a few minutes will produce one trashy hub after another. The emphasis of HubPages should be on weeding out - or strongly encouraging improvement by - the poor quality hubbers - NOT penalising the low traffic hubs of good writers who put a lot of effort into their hubs.
  report
  89
  mistyhorizon2003posted 11 years agoin reply to this
  +1
  report
3. 75
  WriteAngledposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Hear, hear!
  
  The main reason I wanted nothing to do with Squidoo was because of the threat my writing would be censored and hidden from search engines.
  
  Now the censorship has spread to HP.
  
  As many have pointed out, this will hit people producing quality content on very specialised or seasonal topics. Meanwhile, ungrammatical, poorly conceived rubbish on populist topics favoured by the gutter press will thrive as long as it gets the search terms right.
  report
  85
  IzzyMposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  That is what totally pisses me off about the writing online. There are some people, quite a lot actually, who can't write for toffee but can beats us hands down when it comes to SEO, and they get the searches and the rankings.
  
  There is one particular hubber I can think of whose 'work' is simply dreadful, but whose hubs consistently rank highly for their chosen keywords - don't worry, this person seldom if ever forum-posts.
  
  He is not alone. There are loads here like that. HP is a powerful platform and some people take advantage.
  
  I did something different tonight. I often 'hub hop' but usually go through hubs ~ latest and look for badly written summaries.
  
  Tonight I actually opened the first 10 or hubs and read them, and they were simply awful. I'd say one in ten were worthy of publication.
  
  That is what we are all up against. It is those hubs that are pulling the whole site down.
  
  Idling hubs may have a lot of disadvantages, but it has got to be better than the status quo.
  report
  87
  Will Apseposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Is this censorship or is HP trying to help save your account from Panda- which means immediate 90 per cent, or so, loss of traffic and earnings?
  
  It is worth pointing out, too, that capable authors are probably suffering from poor pages interlinked with their well crafted pages. If there is a sitewide uptick in traffic next time Panda runs it will be a proven point. If there is no uptick, it will back to the drawing board for HP.
  
  p.s. I love phrases like this-
  
  'Meanwhile, ungrammatical, poorly conceived rubbish on populist topics favoured by the gutter press will thrive'
  
  I can almost hear you shaking a stick in the air as I read.
  
  We need more snobs in this world. I do my best but there just isn't enough time.
  report
4. 87
  Will Apseposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Most authors here go through a learning process- they should certainly be offered the opportunity to learn anyway. Banning authors who haven't picked up the skills to produce pages that get traffic would be a bit harsh. I don't think an algo could easily distinguish between hardened spammers and clueless beginners.
  report
  81
  shibashakeposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Not suggesting such an extreme measure.
  
  As you point out, there are big differences in writing quality, style, seo mastery, etc., on an author by author level. People who are learning should not be excessively penalized, but by the same token, people who have already learned a few things, should not be treated like they are fresh newbies. I feel slightly ridiculous saying this in a writer's site - but really - authorship matters.
  
  Perhaps authorship should be taken into account *before* de-indexing hubs. As you point out, each writer is different, with a different set of skills and objectives. Throwing everyone into the same bin does not seem, to me, to be an effective solution.
  
  " I don't think an algo could easily distinguish between hardened spammers and clueless beginners."
  
  I agree, human reviewers should also be involved, but from a more author-centric perspective.
  
  Track record should count - it counts in almost everything else.
  report
0
chrisinhawaiiposted 11 years ago
Does this mean that hubs can't "mature" if they're idle?

I have a 3-month old post that was made idle, so I tried to optimize it to make it more Google-friendly. When it goes active again, will Google see it as a 3-month old post? Or will it appear as something brand new (losing 3 months of aging)?

And what if that post were to remain idle for 12 months (hypothetically speaking). If it goes active after being idle for 12 months, will Google see it as a mature 15-month old hub or as a brand new hub or what?
report
1. 0
  ateinposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I have same questions. Can anybody answer them ?
  report
72
toknowinfoposted 11 years ago
I think overall, we will be able to learn a lot about creating better hubs from these changes. What we learn from tweaking this hubs, will carry over to future hubs we write. In the long run, I really think, we will be better off, even though now, this is causing some confusion and inconvenience to update our articles. In time, we will see what this bears.
report
74
Reality Bytesposted 11 years ago
Hypothetical:

Hub is published but needs 24 hours idle time before it is indexed.

An unscrupulous individual copies the page within that time frame and publishes it elsewhere. No idle time with the copy, it is available to be indexed immediately.

Who has the superior standing? Is it based on HP publish date or search engine noticing it?
report
1. 53
  janderson99posted 11 years agoin reply to this
  My guess is that it will be indexed much faster in HP than elsewhere, despite the delay. It will be very hard to find while pending.
  report
2. 87
  Will Apseposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  This could be done. Follow successful writers and pick out the plums. Perhaps hubs should not appear on profile pages until they are actually indexed in Google.
  
  Having said that there has always been a delay between publication and Google indexing. It is just a little longer now.
  
  It was unfortunate that the first article you published after this update was on corporate fascism. Could make anyone paranoid if it disappears down a worm hole.lol,
  report
  74
  Reality Bytesposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  LOL, the first time a well known individual mentions the term though, I could do pretty well.
  
  report
  95
  SmartAndFunposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  If it ever gets indexed.
  report
  76
  Kangaroo_Jaseposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Will,
  
  Alot of successful writers don't always have accounts that are apparent to others.
  report
  87
  Will Apseposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Your point being?
  report
  57
  tussinposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  ...point being that you can't know for sure which accounts are successful enough to pursue the strategy of "Follow successful writers and pick out the plums. " Most people with more than one account keep their more successful account off the forums and under the radar to prevent the kind of topic poaching you are describing
  report
  59
  Norman Steinposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I'm confused here, people have more than one account?
  report
  59
  paradigmsearchposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Yep. Many, many have several, several.
  report
  76
  Kangaroo_Jaseposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Yes Norman,
  You can have more than one account on HubPages. But using another account on the forums is bad and will get ALL your accounts banned if not managed properly. (In other words, do not create accounts to improve views on your original account, or spam others or cause other nonsense)
  
  But it can be a very valuable tool when you want to write under a different account if you want to write about a specific niche or write poetry or prose, etc. Secondary accounts definitely have their uses and value.
  report
  87
  Will Apseposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah, and the sky is blue. Unless it's not.
  
  If that was the point was it really worth the cost of storing it on a server somewhere?
  report
  57
  tussinposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  point being?
  report
  76
  Kangaroo_Jaseposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  The point Will is that you cannot always 'know' what account is someone's success account/s outside of some educated guesses.
  report
3. 59
  Norman Steinposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  The original would get a higher ranking, unless the copy has higher keyword authority from the domain it's in. In fact the copy would be seriously penalized by google for being 'duplicate content'
  
  Unfortunately the 'original' would be the copy since the copy would get indexed first. The author would be screwed.
  report
  95
  SmartAndFunposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Oh my. This is turning into a worrisome mess for so many reasons.
  report
  59
  Norman Steinposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  The more I think about this the more it pisses me off.
  
  Once the rest of the internet realizes this there will be tons of new 'authors' subscribing to every category and just copy/pasting OUR work onto THEIR sites.
  
  Bad move HP, very BAD!!
  report
56
Dame Scribeposted 11 years ago
I don't mind the idea of providing a ZZzzz notice. Updating is good but why not just give a 'Archive' file?

DE-INDEXING? cut off ALL VIEWS from within HP AND the big 'G', is big time extreme

It seems it's not just 'popular and traffic' that is favored but also earner's. As mentioned, some topics are obscure or 'niche' specific and may get $$. They are usually the topics that are favored by advertisers also, aren't they? wouldn't they prefer advertising with a small article of facts rather than a spammy site? or am I wrong on that
report
59
Norman Steinposted 11 years ago
Exposing my intellectual property to theft isn't cool and shouldn't be taken lightly.
report
0
The Writers Dogposted 11 years ago
Talking to my lawyer regarding possible loss of earnings suit due as a result of HP's Idle feature.
report
1. 85
  aa liteposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I'm sorry Writers Dog, but I think that is ridiculous. I hope your lawyer manages to keep a straight face. I had a look at your account, you have 20 hubs, ok maybe you had more and you unpublished. More importantly you haven't managed 10,000 views. That suggests to me that you've made, at most, $50 over the several months you've been in HP, probably less.
  
  I understand you are upset about the idle hubs policy, so are other people, not without reason. But to make these grandiose and (sorry) ridiculous threats about legal action, it makes people not take you seriously and really doesn't help your position.
  
  Suing for
  report
  87
  Will Apseposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  C'mon, at this point, in a thread like this, you have to let the dogs run free. Reason just shouldn't be allowed to intrude. lol.
  report
2. 85
  IzzyMposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  This is the craziest thing I have ever heard on here!
  report
  0
  The Writers Dogposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I know IzzyM... but I bet it made you - and lots of others - smile
  
  Something we could all do with thanks to HP.!
  
  EDIT: Back to moving elsewhere
  report
  85
  IzzyMposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Maybe you should wait for the next Google update to see if this latest move does actually increase your traffic?
  
  If it doesn't, I will be busy myself moving a lot of stuff offsite, but for now I am prepared to wait it out.
  report
75
WriteAngledposted 11 years ago
What I find so sad about this whole business is the fact that HP prefers to stab so many of its partners in the back rather than find positive ways to help them.

I'm not talking about the outright spammers, spinners and outright plagiarists. I fail to see why it is not possible simply to wipe out the accounts of people with a hubber score of, let's say, 10 and below. Nobody, who makes a serious attempt at hub production has such low scores.

However, there are thousands of people, who are trying their best to make some money here, but are not succeeding because they lack certain skills or understanding.

Instead of concentrating its staff time and money on a miniscule minority of apprentices, HP could focus resources on providing something useful for this majority.

For example, how about setting up an internal skills exchange? People could offer their skills to help those who find SEO a mystery, have no time for promoting stuff on social networks, or need some assistance with language,style or layout.

People could earn points for "assisting" others in the ways listed above, for hub hopping and maybe for other things. The services of "assistants" would be bought with points. People, who needed points but did not succeed in earning them could buy them for cash. People, who collected surplus points could exchange them for cash and thus boost their income from the site.

Staff resources would be needed to set up the transaction system in the first place. Since staff can be made available to program stab-in-the-back algorithms, I'm sure they could find someone to create such a system instead.

Staff would also be needed to approve such an "assistant" status on the basis of past output on HP. Again, why not have people do this rather than helping a tiny number of individuals polish their hubs?

Apart from that, the system would run more or less on its own. I think the cash flow in and out would probably balance out, but anyway, if HP is willing to make up-front payments to apprentices for hubs that might never succeed, it obviously has cash to spare to help oil the wheels.

Such a system could result in a lot more hubbers producing successful hubs, which would earn more money for HP as well as for the hubbers.
report
1. 75
  carol7777posted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I like your ideas a lot.
  report
2. 75
  carol7777posted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I like your ideas a lot.
  report
3. 77
  MyWebsposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  You have some great ideas.
  report
4. 68
  Terri Meredithposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  These are terrific ideas. I think a mentoring program is just the thing! I knew nothing about SEO when I came here, and now I only know a fraction. When you work another job, unrelated to web design, tools, marketing... there isn't much time left in a day to try to learn so much. It's always changing and by the time you think you've got something figured out, changes go into affect.
  
  I'll give you an example: I wrote an article back in Feb that got about 1800 hits in less than a month. It was a hot topic but there was lots of competition for the ranking. Mine was 1st page and wavered between 4th and 5th position. I was competing with national news sources. The information in the article is still very relative even now. I continued to see a handful of hits from late April through early June. Then Cooper Anderson did an update on his show. I grabbed a couple hundred more hits for a week or two and have been getting hits ever since.
  
  I discovered it had been linked to by another website, besides my own. Woo Hoo! Guess what? The link doesn't show in my stats. In fact, every one of my hubs shows only ONE backlink, even though I have done a bit of my own on other sites like my blog. I have no clue how to go about finding out why this is or how to fix it. I get traffic from the backlinks, but they don't seem to appear in the stats. Maybe my lack of education is the problem. I don't know.
  
  So many of the writers on here are writing because they have a need to make money. They don't have the cash to pay someone else up front. What I wouldn't do for someone to help me figure it all out!
  report
  71
  sunforgedposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  The HP backlink stats never meant 1 for 1 - it was just a quick view scale - 4 star = lots of links, not 4 links
  
  They should just retire it as it doesnt work anymore. The Yahoo/Google API services used for that type of discovery are no longer operational/free and havent been so for quite along time.
  report
  31
  Writer Foxposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  You can get a full list of all backlinks to your sub domain by going to Google Webmasters Tools Home Page and clicking on 'Traffic' on the left side menu. There you will find the selection for links.
  
  If you haven't registered your profile page with Webmaster Tools, do it. It's free. Instructions are on the site: www.google.com/webmasters/tools/
  report
  68
  Terri Meredithposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  I didn't think it could only mean one, but I couldn't figure it out since some hubs have more than only a few. Thanks
  
  Thanks Writer Fox. I was having a lot of trouble awhile back. The site kept saying I wasn't the owner....that I needed to be added. I sort of forgot about it and I'm so glad you reminded me. They're now working! Sanitary Smooches sent to you!
  report
5. 74
  Horatio Plotposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  Finally. Somebody talking some sense. This is a great idea WriteAngled. Best suggestion on the whole damn thread. HubPages could use seasoned writers to offer advice. A great solution for experienced Hubbers and Newbies alike.
  There would have to be some way of making sure the advice was good enough though and not just the random babblings of any idiot who thought they knew what was what. . They could use Apprentice Program graduates to offer the advice. The little "a" is a sign of quality and is becoming well respected across the community. It would make for a great extra income stream too.
  Well done you, great idea.
  Horatio
  report
  88
  SimeyCposted 11 years agoin reply to this
  One of the thiings I am learning on the 'a' program is that there are a lot of people who are willing to help each other. As you write a hub you get great feedback from each other and end up producing better hubs.
  
  I know I am not the best writer on HP, and I know there are a lot of people who think the AP is an 'elite' system that awards a chosen few for producing hubs - you cannot argue that point, but the scheme is expanding. Just looking at the hubs that others are producing in my group shows me that the whole thing is very good - there is definitely a higher standard of hub that are well researched and should get traffic being produced - and while there is a small 'prize' for writing these, the payoff in the end for HP will be increased traffic, and moving forward a increase of quality.
  
  I like the idea of 'a' being mentors, and I believe this will happen to a certain extent - but there still has to be some additional critiria - just because you have been taught to produce quality hubs doesn't mean you will be a great mentor.
  
  Perhaps as 'a' become mentors, the whole AP can be expanded so that everyone can enter and benefit - the program is new, but I am sure it can be amended based on some of the feedback form both alums and also those who don't agree with the program.
  
  Discussion and disagreement is healthy for HP will always be around; however we have to find a way to communicate in a constructive manner - simply standing on a soap box and shouting never works - and of course communication is a two way thing...
  report

Closed to reply

jump to first post

Previous 1 2 3 45 6 Next

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

Introducing Idle Hubs

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies