Looks like the QAP is indeed going after older hubs, just as Paul said. Let me put this in perspective a little though - in 3 years I have seen a hub get a 100 score maybe 3 or 4 times. And never for more than a day or so.
Now - happy day! - I have 3 of them! Three hubs, all at 100! And 2 more at 99 - that's almost as rare as 100!
All three of them have blue arrows. How's that for ironic?
Good job! I should go delete some more old crap hubs. Nah too lazy, they can get QAPped.
So do I delete the crap hubs with blue arrows or promote the ones at 100? I'd be promoting a deleted hub!
Hahaha!! I see my first 100 ever. It does get decent traffic though
Oh no! Now one of the 100's has dropped to 99 - the one with the most ever, monthly, weekly and daily traffic!
Wonder if I should delete all the high traffic hubs?
OK, I'm confused. Are you saying your 100 and 99 score hubs got QAPd?
What's the ironic part of the Blue Arrows part? They were getting more traffic after QAP?
I really don't get how it works. I have a hub that's over 1,300 words, has 3 photos (properly attributed, of course!), a map, a quiz and a video, I've set it out as usual (sidebars etc) yet it scores lowest of my hubs now - 68 - much less than some shorter hubs. I guess Hub score is as big a mystery as Hubber score.
I don't either, Judi - I just found it funny that they all had blue arrows. Warped sense of humor, I guess.
It isn't just about following formats, etc...the writing has to be good and the topic fresh and well covered.
I don't look at hubscores at all, normally. But now you have forced me to, I am obliged to notice fresh faces at the top of the accounts page.
I also noticed one of my old, out of date pages got QAPed on quality grounds. Poor little thing, harmless and barely clinging to life before, and now stamped on by a Hunnish mTurk. Sigh...
I realise that it isn't just about the format. However, my style of writing doesn't deviate greatly between my history hubs and this topic is covered no less comprehensively than I have covered other topics. I'm entirely willing to accept that all my writing is crap and that I don't do justice to any of my topics - in which case all my hubs should be languishing in the 60s because this one is on a par with them.
I'm not whining that my hub has been "criticised" (WIlderness and the late, great SimeyC were in my AP group and I got used to them and others offering critiques of my hubs - this one included). I'm commenting that it doesn't make sense to me that this hub should fair badly in the QAP when nearly all the others are scoring way above it.
Postscript - it's now risen to 72, putting it amongst some earlier, shorter "sales" hubs I wrote.
Couple of things make this different, Judi.
1) you get no feedback as to what is "wrong", and must run your low scoring hub through the QAP yourself, trying to be objective, instead of watching Simey or I gleefully rip it apart while detailing in gruesome detail all two of it's spelling errors. Tough to do on your own writing; if you thought it was bad you wouldn't have written it the way you did!
2) there is more to hubscore than the QAP, but we don't know what and don't know how much of it is the QAP. Engagement, for instance is probably still a part of it and that might even include time on page. I do note that all but one of my 100's (4 now, with 3 99's) are seeing double digit daily traffic and that single exception has 409 for the month; a daily average of double digit.
I believe reader engagement is a large part of the score. I have a hub which gets traffic and has all the bells and whistles that HubPages wants. The Hubscore is in the mid 70's though, and I believe it is because of the lack of engagement - it only has 2 out of 5 stars.
Now I just need to figure out how to keep the reader on my page....
If it doesn't, it would seem to be a prime candidate to become a part of it. Assuming, of course, that HP can measure time on page.
They measure it but not very accurately.
I seem to be one of the few people who ever takes time on page seriously but it is a pretty infallible guide as to whether you have written a page that meets a readers needs. And in my experience, Google soon works out if you have, and delivers the traffic.
Agree 100%. Time on page, IMHO, is one of the most important things we have to judge the value of a page. And I agree that google pays attention to it, too.
I do wish that HP could get a more accurate reading, but we do have google to look at.
I agree. As far as the positive signs go, I would think time-on-page trumps all else.
Which makes me wonder why my top three hubs, according to Hub Score, have less than 10 hits between them today
And the Hub I was originally wondering about is now at a 75. I've not changed it and it has had no more visitors than usual and no comments.
Hub Score, another fine mystery from the creators of Hubber Score
all i could say is Congratulations! Getting 3 hubs to hit 100 are great and i am sure your earnings are raising too. The highest score i could get on my hub is 94, never more than that . What's your secret?
For months my hubs went bipolar screaming up then down in the dumps...kind of like living with my ex again.
I thought it was impossible to reach absolute zero till I looked at my scores today...they're so low I have to lie on the floor to see them...and why does that "We're dumping this crappie hub symbol" have to look like a '0' anyway...like rubbing salt in the wound...What's ironic is I still have a mid nineties author score...It's beginning to look like originality is unwelcome around here...HP has become ultra PC...yuck!
Subtle change in policy - the 'Half-Eclipse - Half Moon' hubs (idled for low traffic) now get deindexed and go into the 'Pending' sin bin. The 'low quality' full eclipse ones remind me of bullet holes. Ho Hum! Keep on dancing baby!
??MY half moon are just that - half moon and not pending.
But if you edit them, do they go to the swirling sin bin. A long time ago, in a galaxy far away, the half moons used to go straight back to being indexed and featured with a little edit of two, out of jail without passing go.
Oh, I see. I'm not sure - I've only got one I'm concerned about, and am running a short trial - wanting to wait a bit before editing - so don't know what will happen when I do.
I assume, though, that it will go to pending. I wonder if HP has, or could, make it so that a half moon goes to featured upon editing while a full eclipse goes to pending? That might make good sense if the hub has already passed QAP.
Well, all I know is that I now have a website with six ex-hubs, where Adsense clicks are increasing nicely in quantity and value, despite the fact I have not touched the site in months and do not follow "stellar" guidelines on having endless photos and a plethora of useless polls and suchlike. The site does not get huge traffic and the separate pages would probably be idled if they had remained as hubs, but the click I got on the site today is worth about 2 weeks of the HP Ads+Adsense earnings I am getting on my remaining 20+ hubs on HP, so I'm happy and it seems Google is as well.
That is very interesting. I don't think 'stellar' is the issue for Google - it is the other stuff that surrounds it.
Well, I'm happy that I subscribe to a place where I get unlimited web sites with a simplified Wordpress set up (and unlimited non-WP sites as well) included in my subscription. That means all I need to risk further is the price of a domain for one year (often found at discount prices). I buy the domain and set it up. One year later, I can decide if it is bringing in enough to justify renewing the domain or not.
My sub also gives me access to loads of training material on setting up and marketing web sites. Unfortunately, i have not had enough spare time to look into this at all.
Well, I've just deleted another hub on another account and moved it to a web site I have not touched since I set it up a couple of years ago. That site is also currently earning more from Adsense than I am earning from HP Ads + HP-related Adsense.
by Trudy Cooper2 years ago
Why do you think the hub with the highest score was scored higher than your others? Interested to know.
by peacefulparadox7 years ago
It is advantageous to delete one's own low scoring hubs that have little traffic. I figure getting rid of the low score would increase the average of the rest of one's hubs.What do you think?
by Sleepylog3 years ago
I'd love to read other hubbers' highest ranked hubs to see if there's anyway I could improve some of mine. Maybe we could all learn from each other that way. My coconut milk soap recipe hub has the best score of all of...
by Liam Hallam2 years ago
After 6 months on the site i've started the really wonder how many backlinks is a reasonable number to any hub, and really to a hub becoming successful? Or is it simply a lottery.What kind of figures do other hubbers...
by theirishobserver.7 years ago
Yesterday I spent some time deleting some of my Hubs that were performing badly is this a good idea as my Hub score seems to have taken a big hit.
by Catherine Giordano20 months ago
My hub scores range from 65 to 87 as of the last time I looked. My average is 73. To me it seems like I have a "C" average. I'm disappointed and discouraged. I am doing everything that is...
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.