|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.|
|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.|
|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.|
Why doesn't HP implement a 'Trusted Authors' scheme where established writers can by-pass the 24 hour 'Pending' test for new hubs. As an established writer, I find this very annoying especially as the Google bot trawls Pending hubs, sees the NOINDEX Tag and does not re-crawl the page for days or weeks. I have to submit every new hub to Google Webmaster Central which is a pain and is time consuming and not always successful. Surely after 10 hubs have been approved - authors can be trusted? You can warn people that any slip-ups will mean that their 'trusted' status would be down-graded and re-evaluated for their next 10 hubs. Wouldn't this free up resources to test the 'newbies'? Other sites do this why not HP?
Well, I don't know how they choose hubbers to feature right now.
I've recently seen two new hubbers join those who get instant featuring. Both have lowish hubberscores and well less than 10 hubs.
And their hubs were short.
'Scuse the thick question, but how can you tell who's got instant featuring?
Ah, I see now - thanks! Bit baffled as to why they would let totally new people benefit from this instant featuring. I'd have thought putting people on moderation for the first half dozen or ten hubs would be the ideal way of cutting down spam/crap at source.
As I understand it, they are testing to see if they can cut down on the time. Are they, then, intentionally letting a variety of hubs go through their automatic system very rapidly to see what happens? To see if it is catching what it should?
Testing with only known good hubs probably wouldn't do much good.
You could be right. They let a really poor one through the other day. Not so much badly written as a one paragraph effort.
It lasted about 3 hours, then disappeared.
I wish they would hurry up and let us all have the instant featuring again. It is approaching Christmas, the busiest time of the year.
I got the impression that was their ultimate aim, but could be wrong of course.
Sounds reasonable to me. The powers that be in HP aren't stupid, and they know very well that the Xmas season is major. That the less delay the better, particularly during that period.
If a pitiful excuse for a hub lasted only 3 hours, that could be exactly what they're trying to do, to find a way to accomplish just that without undue delay of better ones. Sounds hopeful, anyway.
I'm not that sure the word 'Trusted' should be applied to anything relating to this set of supposed 'improvements'...
Perhaps they were 'only testing' when they removed 4 of my primary traffic hubs from page 1 on Google.... which now gain F-all traffic, have lost their PR and now can be disposed of simply because my directness is not appreciated!
What a great way of destroying 3 years efforts...
I suppose all those great keywords are now available to be shared with newly courted newbies and alike! I don't believe this has anything to do with Google - All my links have been manipulated internally since at least November last year!
@ Izzy... Perhaps you should have a closer look at all your linking historically... you may find the exact reason why some of us have clearly been 'tested' in what I consider to be an unwarranted and unethically 'untrustworthy' manner! I'm not sure if this 'testing' has been done on US writers here - but it sure has to some of those other non-US writers that I know of... A horrible dark thought, when one considers that a great deal of non-US writers have helped HubPages to achieve every goal it has achieved... I'm thinking aloud... and I'm sure that what I'm thinking has been thought of by others!
Nothing.... Absolutely Nothing justifies this re-indexing, manipulating or ripping down quality work that has on its own quality merits, risen to prominence within the search engines and has done so having fully followed TRUSTED SEO and Google advice! All my SE positions have effectively now been Hijacked with this BS process - (which in the absence of any genuine transparency remains in my professional opinion - BS).
One of the Best Things I know about business people who prefer to act without transparency is this:-
"That it is Not about what is Said - It is Solely about What Is NOT Said!"
Hit me with a stick or do your best to discredit my words... But... Nothing that is being promoted as "justified as a result of advice from Google" -(quote) relating of Quality Writer's Work as being substandard justifies removing their page 0ne and Two positions on SEs... Kindly Stop insulting us like this!
Hi janderson, thanks again for the suggestion.
Reputation of the Hubber is indeed taken into account in the QAP so basically what you suggest is already happening.
@IzzyM, that latest Hubs feed you linked is no longer used and has no relationship to Hub status.
Oops I seem to have upset you Derek, as this is the second time this evening you have referenced me in threads?
Also, I had no idea that this feed http://hubpages.com/hubs/latest/ is no longer used, and that it means nothing in terms of whether or not a hub is featured.
If the feed is "no longer used"... well, it still exists and is clearly some subset of hubs. For the sake of the curious: What is it for?
I didn't realize that someone else had brought up the problem that the no index tag creates, obviously hubpages now has 2 suggestions on fixing the issue, janderson and my own that I submitted under the forum titled 24 Hour Pending Publication Has Negative Impact on Search Engine Rank I hope the issue gets dealt with soon. I'm not as new as I look and happen to have an education in SEO and web design, so I hope they take someone's advice to remove the no index tag in some fashion.
Is there not a way to submit a link to be crawled by a search engine, anyway?
I don't recall the site, but it was specifically meant for the "hey, this article has been updated" kind of thing. You insert the link, and it submits it to be crawled (or something).
I believe you are referring to Google's Webmaster tools where you can ask Google to fetch the hub, and hopefully index it.
It doesn't always work, as Google indexes what it wants, not what you want.
by ShailaSheshadri13 months ago
I am writing articles for this website since past 3 months. At present, I have 38 featured and published hubs. I have joined for Amazon and google Adsense program. Past two months I earned like very less amount, less...
by ryankett8 years ago
Is the growth sustainable? When I arrived 4 months ago, we had 400,000 hubs. What is it now, 500,000? Does this site really benefit from people writing almost identical hubs on the same topics?When somebody arrives they...
by Jerrico Usher9 years ago
My new experiment:http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/8289is looking better every day, and in fact I am trying to figure out ways to help as many Huber’s as possible in this path so I decided I'm going to develop my site...
by Paul Goodman6 years ago
Article for discussion. I know that this recent development has already been mentioned by some hubbers in forums. But I am now wondering if this might be the main reason why we are seeing the current traffic...
by Andrew Orrell6 years ago
Ok, so since the Penguin update I have sat here listening to lots of Hubbers complain of loss of traffic. Now we're not talking a little fluctuation in numbers, we are talking 80% gone overnight! For people...
by Susannah Birch7 years ago
I’ve decided to leave Hubpages for the foreseeable future at least. I’ve already taken down quite a few hubs but I’ll be leaving the remaining 85 on this account unless I find a good reason to move them.Why am I...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.