I know that you can choose to display your idle hubs on your profile page, but I don't, because I don't want Google to see them at all and get confused by all those "do not follow."
What this means is that my idle hubs are not available for anyone to see, and I have to actively market them in order for other Hubbers to see them. I'd rather spend my time marketing hubs I want Google to see.
What I propose is a separate profile page for the idle hubs. Most of my idle hubs are things that are specifically for HubPages - advice, favorites, etc. A separate profile page would let other Hubbers see these and yet keep Google out of it.
I can see where this would be of value to you as you have related hubs specfic to HubPages. It makes good sense.
In my case it would not help me as I don't write hubs specific to HP. The ones HP chooses to idle, I simply move elsewhere.
I think it's a non-issue. I haven't been able to find any internet gurus who say having "no follow" pages on a website is a problem (though I'm happy to be proved wrong if anyone can offer a link!). Google doesn't penalize anyone for it, they just ignore them.
The only benefit of hiding Idle Hubs on our profiles is that if a Hub goes into Idle, it will automatically disappear from the list. That means Google is less likely to see it while it's got the "no follow" tag - which gives us time to fix it.
Like you, I have Hubs about Hubbing. I don't really care if Google de-indexes them or not - they were written for other Hubbers. So I'm quite happy to show them on my profile - in fact, I have them as my featured Hubs in the slider, because the only people who visit profiles are other Hubbers, and I want those Hubs to catch their eye.
For other Hubs it's not an issue either, because I've decided that if a Hub goes idle, I'm going to unpublish and move it to another site. So if Google sees the tag will actually help me, because it will de-index sooner.
But that's the point. HubPages wants you to either fix or ditch those idles.
I think that internal hubs are useful internally. Pages specifically about HubPages are not likely to do well in search engines, but may do quite well on the site itself.
My understanding is that the reason they took away the zzz from idle hubs is to keep people from thinking that they are required to do something about them. I have had staffers ask me why I am deleting my idle hubs, since they don't think deleting is necessary.
Here's what staff have to say about it:
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/106060? … ost2258667
and my answer:
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/106060? … ost2258667
Personally, I think they have no idea how writers feel about their work. They seem to think that if someone just writes for the love of it, publishing the article is enough. If it then gets only a handful of readers, they won't care. Personally, I think most writers publish because they want to be read - and since idled Hubs won't be read, I think most writers would want to know that.
I really like the idea of having a separate page for the "loser" hubs. I've found that going back and sprucing up the lagging hubs can make them featured hubs again, so I don't like the idea of encouraging people to just totally delete hubs that they worked hard on but that don't measure up (anymore). I think the focus should be on improving the quality of the hubs and community to draw more traffic here for everyone. By having the lagging hubs on a separate page we can see the difference between "good" and "poor" articles and learn from it and hopefully even invest a small amount of additional time in some of the hubs on the "loser" page to make them featured articles again: in many cases, we've already done most of the work, these hubs just need something more or extra to make them into good hubs.
Relache, have you seen anything anywhere about "no follow" pages damaging a site?
All my Hubs about HubPages are idled, presumably due to low traffic since only Hubbers are interested in reading them. I've had good feedback from Hubbers who find them helpful, so I'm not going to unpublish them.
Instead, I've just opted to show idled Hubs on my profile and put those HubPages Hubs in my featured slider so Hubbers can find them. I can't find any experts who say that showing idled Hubs on my profile will do any harm whatsoever - HubPages seems to be the only site that thinks so.
There isn't anything to fix on every idle Hub post. They shouldn't be dumped either, just because they haven't had some magic number of interest. A post can be quiet for months and then suddenly get a lot of traffic. Not just seasonal posts. I've seen several of my own posts rise and fall and rise again. I don't always find a reason.
It's one thing for HubPages to put some posts as idle but the nofollow is crippling posts and taking away the chance for them to be found. I will never agree with this plan. This is why all my posts are available on my profile and I link to my profile in many places outside of HubPages.
The problem is that no matter how much you link outside of HubPages, they can't get out of Idle because they have the "no follow" tag, so they can't possibly get enough traffic to be revived.
So I'm taking the nuclear approach - if a Hub is idled, I unpublish it, wait till it clears the cache, then republish it elsewhere (Wizzley, Xobba, Zujava, ThisisFreelance). I don't delete because the unpublished version is a handy backup. I make an exception for my HubPages-related Hubs, which I'm leaving published and featuring on my profile.
Of course the moved Hubs may not do any better on those other sites, but at least I know it won't get idled so there is always a chance it will suddenly pick up, as you say.
I am not a big fan if this suggestion as I work hard and have done since Hubs have gone idle to get traffic from other non search engine sources.
I have also invested too much time and energy to move a Hub simply because it has become search engine idled.
....and is that working? I don't believe it's feasible to use "non search engine sources" to achieve the thousands of views necessary to make money from a Hub, without an unreasonable investment in time and energy. It would be nice to find I'm wrong.
But if it's been idled and has already been de-indexed, in my eyes that time and energy has already been wasted, so why throw good time and energy after bad?
Of course one will need an investment in time and energy for non search engine sources. But can one still rely on search engine traffic only if you delist your hubs from here and put them up elsewhere? (say Squidoo, blogs, Zujava, other websites or article sites etc)
One simply doesn't know when a Hub for whatever reason will be idled and i cannot rely on Google alone to bring me traffic.
Getting traffic from Google is simply part of my OVERALL strategy for driving traffic, not the only one.
Of course you can't be sure your Hubs will get search engine traffic if you move them. But at least they are visible, and therefore have a chance to do so. As you've said before, you can be patient on other sites (other than Squidoo), and be happy with a dribble of income, knowing that any article could suddenly take off and do well.
That's the attitude I used to take on HubPages, and many of my Hubs took almost a year to start getting traffic. If I was writing them now, that wouldn't work because they'd probably get idled before they got there.
I was hoping you'd already had some experience attracting "non search engine traffic". I'm still very pessimistic about that working. There is a lot of buzz about using social networking sites to promote your work: but the intention is usually to get enough Likes, Tweets etc to impress Google - not to rely on getting direct traffic from those sites.
Honestly Marisa, I am getting that experience and its very time consuming to build. It is really early days yet to provide any detailed feedback on how its doing.
Search engine traffic is by far my best provider @ 80% of all traffic to my Hubs.
I shifted my approach with using a single article site and I don't like having all my eggs in one basket. I quickly moved and expanded my portfolio elsewhere and onto other sites about 3 months after Panda.
I don't want all my eggs in one basket and be reliant on Google alone. The initial Panda update spoke volumes about that and I refuse to be beholden to Google only to get as the phrase is known 'bums on seats' to view my work.
I really don't want an 87% slaughter in my traffic to happen again due to places like Google updating search algo's and laying waste to months of work.
I wish you luck but honestly, I'm not holding my breath.
Your experience is the same as everyone else on HubPages: you start making money when at least 80% of your traffic comes from search engines, mainly Google. Personally I can't see any way of changing that. I mean, how else do people find stuff on the internet? How do you find what you're looking for? Google, Yahoo or Bing.
Sure there are other avenues, like forums outside HP, social network sites etc. But people who arrive that way are more likely to be "just browsing". They're more likely to have casually clicked on the link than be actively looking for a solution or a product or service - so they're not in a frame of mind to buy, which means (unless you're on a site that pays per view), you won't make money from their visit.
I do agree it's not a good idea to put all your eggs in one basket (unless you own the basket). The biggest problem here is that Google has said it doesn't like content farms, and in its eyes, all article writing sites are basically content farms - even the good ones. What Google say they like is large sites that provide comprehensive coverage of a single broad subject. Given that, I can only see rev-sharing sites continuing to go downhill, and that's why these days I concentrate on my single-subject blogs.
I've seen several which were idle (and republished with no real change) become active again. I think the idle thing is a nuisance. I have all my posts visible in my profile. I see idled posts get traffic. Most likely based on my promoting them or from people who have the link to my profile and find them that way.
I totally agree with That Grrl! The "No follow" isn't fair to some hubs that have either cyclic or random "spikes" of interest. I've seem random, unaccounted-for spikes in traffic to many of my hubs with periods (even long periods) of silence inbetween. If there's a separate page created, hubs that are improved by their authors or that suddenly "spike" in traffic should automatically be moved back to the main page, in my opinion, so that they can get the promotion they need to continue to shine.
It does make sense, but would be a problem to set up. Basically they would have to create a page (new profile page which has the rel nofollow tag) and then place all your idle hubs there. I doubt this will happen anytime soon
I don't understand why hubs have to be idle at all.
Is Google ever going to work for us or are we going to keep jumping through hoops to guess at the latest Google experiment?
Excellent idea. If you write a lot of HP specific hubs it is tuff to figure how to tweak them back to life. hP specific hubs are valuable for all and we should be able to see them by browsing. I don't think it should be technically difficult.
I'm curious what you guys think of the idea of having a separate sorta"HubPages Meta" section of the site for Hubs about HubPages? Perhaps Hubs published to this area would not be associated with your profile or the rest of your content, so you could freely publish Hubs about HubPages without worry about it's effect on the rest of your content not focused on HubPages?
I agree with the issue you're raising Millionaire Tips. A separate profile isn't my favorite way to solve it though.
Just as a side note, if you have a Hub that is no longer Featured simply for traffic reasons, you might consider adding some more text content to it. The data we've been looking at lately seems to indicate that generally speaking, more words means more traffic regardless of the initial Hub length. So adding 100 more words should generally get you 100 words worth of additional traffic, adding 100 words to a 500 word Hub may get it 1/5 more traffic. If your Hub is borderline, that may be just enough to keep the Hub above the Featured threshold for traffic and well-positioned to receive any future spike in traffic.
How do you envision this meta site working? Would the author be identified? Would there be ad revenue?
Just informally throwing out ideas, I was thinking that there would not be ad revenue (if that's what you're going for maybe Hubbers aren't the best audience anyway?), and that the author would be identified.
Another idea that came up recently was to allow this type of content to be collaboratively created by Hubbers, kind of like a documentation wiki. Might help avoid some of the problem with misinformation that we currently have because there would be one semi-authoritative place for content on that subject that HubPages staff could review and correct any errors. But it would still allow Hubbers to create helpful content for other Hubbers.
I would prefer to get ad revenue. I am one of those people who pick up pennies off the sidewalk. It isn't a lot, but sometimes even a little is encouraging. It is a matter of perspective.
A wiki is a good idea, but most of the information is covered in the learning center anyway. The hub has these benefits: 1. it is available to the followers and easy to see on the profile, 2. it is written in different words so that if someone didn't understand something in the learning center, they might this way, and 3. gives tips and strategies that are not in the learning center. The learning center entry on Adwords Keyword tool, for example, doesn't tell you to not worry about competition, it just doesn't talk about it. A sentence in a hub will tell you that competition does not apply. (this is based on my limited knowledge of SEO). Plus a hub could use more examples that might possibly help things click.
For the hubs I have written about HubPages, I have written
1. how-tos (the wiki idea would probably work for those, but you would have to allow for room for different examples)
2. list of my favorite hubs, includes links to other hubs, and my own
3. my ongoing experience with a challenge, 30/30 or 100/30 (including links to hubs I've published)
4. my goals
The wiki could work on the how-tos, and even the rest if it had links to different hubs that were able to provide these individual experiences and favorites.
I like that concept. I actually think it would be a good idea not to have ad revenue. It would mean that anyone writing a Hub about Hubbing would be doing it to be helpful, not for profit reasons - which would help keep the quality up.
However, it would be confusing to have both the learning center and the wiki. The learning center is already too big and I get the impression newbies are daunted by it, so they end up not reading any of it! There is also stuff in there that hasn't been updated, BTW.
I would also be disappointed not to have those Hubs on my profile, as even if I don't earn revenue, it adds to my presence. Maybe there could be another section on the profile showing contributions to the wiki?
I think that Hubbers are a valid audience for our articles! We see the same ads as everyone else and click on them (presumably) in the same percentages. I know I've clicked on numerous ads while reading Hub Pages, and I'm obviously a Hubber. Is my click worth less than someone who isn't a Hubber? I don't think it should be... In my opinion, Hub articles about HubPages-related topics should generate the same ads and garner the same $rewards as any other hub.
HP posts could have their own section.Posts about HP are only relevant to the people writing here. So they don't serve a real purpose being part of the profile for the general public. Plus, it would be nice for them to have a chance at being read. I find they die pretty quick and don't get a second chance.
My HP specific hubs actually rate really high and rarely go idle. For the ones that do, I've tweaked titles to appeal to more writers out there. I would suggest doing that. For example, changing "hub" to "article" helps a lot.
You can never escape office politics. In the hive we thrive on it.
There is a new feature in Pinterest that allows users to create a set of 3 secret pin boards. I created one and since that, my number of followers shot to over 100. That's despite only allowing one person besides me seeing what is in the pin board.
It does not appear in search engine results. But my followers climbed anyway. Pin boards are not immune to being affected or noticed by social media. It seems that "idle" hubs are.
I feel these two apparently unrelated subjects could be somehow ... very related.
by xpressrite2 years ago
So hubbers help? I had four hubs that went from the pending state to having the featured status. Originally they were all viewed on the page where you can hop hubs.Now I dont no where...
by Paul Edmondson4 years ago
We really appreciated the feedback from the community and want to continue to incorporate feedback into this feature that will be released in informational mode today so people can see it in their my account.The blog...
by Randy Godwin4 years ago
So I've deleted all of the idled hubs so far and am wondering when I will have none left. I'm not going to edit anymore until I see some sort of improvement in traffic. Too much trouble for no results at...
by Georgianna Lowery4 years ago
This is a two-fold issue. I know we're in the middle of a Google Typhoon or whatever animal is wreaking havoc this month plus the summer traffic is, well, obviously somewhere else. In January/February of this year, my...
by Simone Haruko Smith4 years ago
Hey everyone!We have just released the ability to choose whether or not you showcase Idle Hubs on your HubPages Profile. By default, Idle Hubs will not show up on your Profile, so if you would like them to appear, visit...
by Melissa Flagg OSC4 years ago
I don't know if anyone else has this problem, but I'm having issues noticing when a hub goes idle. Is there any way we can put like a red H icon on idle hubs instead of leaving it blank? That would make it much easier...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.