QAP just flat-out rejects those now. Even when the article content delivers 100% on what the title promises. I'm just not wiling to spend the time and labor to add another 300 words of what would be pure fluff and BS just to get by QAP. It's just not worth it to me. Plus, that 300 words of BS and fluff would actually degrade the article, not improve it.
There has to be a content farm out there that:
A. Accepts 200-300 word, quality informational articles.
B. And isn't in Google's doghouse.
And don't anyone mention Bubblews. That site is such a total piece of fecal matter that Google is going to stomp on them any day now.
I'm not aware of any sites that would accept 2-300 words, it seems they've all really clamped down of late. Could you not start another blog where it might be more appropriate to place them- at least you'll have plenty of content to stick on it straight away.
Any "content farm" that accepts such short pieces is also going to be stomped on by Google very soon if they haven't been already.
I agree with the fluffing garbage. Frankly, there's a lot of people who want to get information as quickly as possible and move on. Sometimes as soon as people see a page is long and wordy, they're violently hitting the back arrow. What about adding a pic, video and/or poll? All of my hubs are Featured and I have some with word counts in the high 200s-low 300s.. but I usually try to slap a couple extra visually pleasing things in there, that are hopefully relevant. Just a thought?
I'll give QAP one more shot tomorrow. I'll add the purdy pics. And hopefully my subconscious can come up with at least a couple more non-fluff, non-BS paragraphs by then.
Add the fluff below a full size pic so the reader will more than likely never scroll to see it. Provide the relevant information at the top for the readers and the fluff at the bottom for the QAP!
Don't forget a map and a poll!
If newbie posted a Hub of that length, I'd be patiently explaining that HubPages isn't a blog, and that the best-performing Hubs are at least 400 words and preferably much longer.
It doesn't mean there's anything wrong with your writing, it's just a question of choosing the right venue for your writing. 200-300 words is a blog post, so I'd be posting them on your blog.
The other option? Photos and videos count as content too. On HubPages, you're not just a writer - you're also the graphic designer and the editor for your online magazine. Hubs are supposed to be visually pleasing as well as informative.
You could think about polls. If you're writing an opinion piece, why aren't you including a poll to elicit your readers' opinion too?
What about 'webanswers.com' ? I just signed up to test it out. I'm not crazy about having to answer 60 questions before getting paid. Just a thought.
Why not try a blog?, you can put any ads on there that you want to and you are in charge of the content.
Just a thought
I thought of WebAnswers too, or something similar. Ehow might be another place.
What you're looking for is a high quality place that is accepting low quality articles that could be answered by a Q&A forum. Tough to find.
Thanks, for the WebAnswers suggestions. I researched them. $10 for 5 months work seems to be the average there. Plus all their hoops they want us to jump through. Gonna pass.
Researching eHow reveals too much negative info about their previous conduct towards writers. Plus, the google stomping thing may very well come into play with them as well. From previous observations, Mr Penguin is going to be very perturbed with them...
Im sorry to come across as blunt but you can only get out what you put in. Why not add statistics and list (but don't link) the sites where you got them from, then analyse and compare and theorise to make it thought-provoking or to stem creative thoughts. One of the ways to write great content is to include info/facts from various sources as this saves the visitor browsing around, you've got the answers there.
I'm not an expert as I'm still learning the ways but this is info I have picked up along the way which has helped me write and has helped me when I've been browsing for info.
I don't mind the bluntness. You are right. I freely admit that I am beginning to rebel against the work-to-reward ratio.
I have gone in two directions to solve tjis and some other such problems that are now problems with HP.
First, I have several Google Blogs for such short articles, that I actually removed from HP because of their ever growing list of restrictions.
And, I have two Wordpress sites set up now.
One, I call a home site and it includes some original and short works as blog posts, as well as a number of links to specific HP Hubs. These have driven more traffic o my works on HP and more than offset any small income I had from short or other unloved articles that I removed from HP. Also, I have written several short posts that have a link to my shorter works on Blogger.
The second site is a RV and Camper centric site strictly for those who are into that world.
Working this way has given me more traffic on HP, more traffic to my Blogger Blogs, and a nice site for centralization of my works.
I pretty much suspected that what is said here is true. I just needed to hear it from others. Non-slave-labor content sites are a thing of the past. Blogs are all that is left. But this brings up a whole new set of issues. So much so, I will start a second thread to address it. Stay tuned...
So what do you think this portends for us poets and wanna-be cooks here at HP? Or are poems and recipes accepted as shorter articles by Google?
No they're not, and it's one of the reasons I've always worried about HubPages making an exception for them.
Remember, Panda doesn't penalize one article It looks at your whole sub-domain and awards the whole sub-domain a score based on your worst quality Hub. So if you have even one poor quality Hub, you've just consigned all your Hubs to the toilet. Length is definitely one parameter Panda uses, so personally there is no way I would be posing single poems with no additional material.
In reference to what I bolded... I have trouble believing that Google would be so incredibly stupid as to design an algo that way...
Really? You have a higher opinion of Google than I do.
I forget where the link is but Google has actually said that's how it works.
Hopefully someone will post it. If Google is that asininely arbitrary; it's time for me to make a major policy shift here...
Actually I'm guilty of exaggeration I think. One page may not do it, but certainly your Panda score is heavily influenced by your poorest quality posts. I know because it happened to me: my ballet site got Panda'd. That's when I found out about it - because I spent hours trawling the web trying to work out why.
Eventually I found the advice that even one or two poor quality posts could damage your whole site. I realized I had three or four posts which were just a video and a few lines of explanatory text. I combined them into one post - and my site recovered at the next Panda update. By the way, my site had over 100 pages at the time. That was enough evidence for me!
A couple of good Hubs on Panda:
http://greekgeek.hubpages.com/hub/googl … ounce-rate
I can get 300 worders through If I put them in 4 or more text capsules with headings and three or more big, bright photographs. Form is more important than function, it seems.
The question is, not that I know the answer I'm just throwing it out there, even if those articles can be sneaked through QAP, would they be viewed negatively by Goggle? Might it affect your subdomain?
If it helps, as far as I know, no rater counts words.
I personally look at 1. Is it helpful and 2. Is it promotional. Those are the two biggies (No and yes) that will fail on substance. (Under 5 score)
The wall of text, utterly no white, the wall of linkage and really hard to read formats will fail on organization. Titles that don't match content fall in here too.
Writing like your hamster is running across your keyboard (B4 u go 2 teh gr8 prk), obviously spun word choice (using "rain forest" when referring to Amazon product -yes I've seen it) and complete and utter failure at the English language will get you lower than 5.
Just my completely unofficial take on it. I have no idea if any of those apply to the hub(s) in question.
I just joined Bubblews. I am writing show pieces. They have their own ad thing going, not Google.
The thing you are missing here is that the reason HP urges longer articles is that when you do, you naturally use more keywords, and when you do that, the search engines find your work, reads go up and so does the money. Google wants informed and detailed articles, not quick summaries. THIS is why HP wants you to write the longer articles.
I meant to type "short" pieces, not show pieces.
This link keeps track of the rank for article directories. It might come in useful for you.
As to my rejected hub that started all this...
Ya know... That was a good little reference hub that gave the searcher exactly and completely the reference information the searcher was looking for. Any reader going there would have been served well, and it would have made Google and HubPages look good.
I could bang out reference articles like that at the rate of one a day, everyday. But not when the QAP requirements are also invoked.
So, I've unpublished and transferred the critter to a blog.
Next, I'm going to see if I really can do one a day, everyday, for awhile on the blog. Then, based on how that goes, I'll figure out what to do next. If the blog starts getting a lot more traffic, I'll keep doing it. If no substantial change in traffic, time to get a new domain name.
I've wondered about short articles too. Sometimes when I do a search, I just want an answer to a question. I don't like looking through all sorts of other stuff.
I agree, use them as answers to questions. Have you tried Webanswers.com? The questions are pla in categories and are relatively easy to find. You can also search for a topic. All your short articlres would do very well as answers if you can match them to a question.
Did you know that you would have to post 60 such articles for free, before they would even start to pay you? Even worse, there's posts saying they take away such articles and stop paying at the drop of a hat. Excepting for HP, my content-site days are done.
Also, I just discovered this... http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/112987#post2404633 Looks like webanswers is history.
I got paid at webanswers from day one. Not a lot, but for every post.
I guess they have changed the rules. My sources were a post on this thread and a Squidoo article. After those I didn't even bother to go to WA for a personal checkout. Besides, this thread has resulted in my deciding to go my own domain names route going forward.
by Angela Michelle Schultz5 years ago
I feel concerned that the reason google may prefer ehow as opposed to hubpages, is because there is an abundance of poetry and short stories. I am not by any means saying that those who publish the short stories...
by Susana S7 years ago
There have been several theories about what content Google is penalising and rewarding in the search results but at the moment it does seem a bit random (from my end). Let's compare notes and hopefully we can see some...
by Melissa Flagg OSC2 days ago
I just noticed today that traffic on my most popular hub started to plummet. Like 200 views in 3 hours and still dropping. So I decided to check to see if it had been scraped. I found this site: arttek.spb. ruThat looks...
by Will Apse5 years ago
There is a lot of SEO related stuff about Panda in these forums, so here is something about quality and the kinds of content Google is trying to find and offer to searchers:It comes from Amit Singhal, Google Fellow and...
by Katherine Tyrrell12 months ago
This is worth a read Updated Google Quality Rater Guidelines target fake news, low quality and clickbait"It includes a link to Google's REVISED (March 2017) Search Quality - General GuidelinesIn terms...
by Steve Andrews5 years ago
When it was first introduced I was annoyed by it but made an effort to tweak my hubs to get them out of Idle status. Now, a whole load have got zzs against them again and many of them are hubs that at one point were...
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.