How Can HubPages Help You Improve your traffic?

Jump to Last Post 1-50 of 60 discussions (214 posts)
  1. Paul Edmondson profile imageSTAFF
    Paul Edmondsonposted 10 years ago

    I've been doing a lot of thinking about the types of services we offer Hubbers and how to help Hubbers improve.

    A few services that have been suggested
    - grammar and spell checking
    - suggesting edits
    - providing images/media upon request
    - formatting help (breaking hubs into multiple text capsules, fixing spacing issues)

    What services would you like to help improve your hubs and in return your traffic?

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Can you find some big bruiser to visit Google them? big_smile

      A grammar checker might be of some value to me, but not a high priority.  Truthfully, I would probably find the most value in seeing an accurate QAP score, broken into sections, for each hub.  I understand that isn't in the near future, though.  Or maybe not ever.

      But even an inaccurate score would be valuable and indicate which hubs are in possible need of editing and improving.  Traffic is not a real good sign, and certainly hub score isn't either.

      1. Barbara Kay profile image72
        Barbara Kayposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        I agree with wilderness. If we heard what our QAP score was, we could then work for a 10.

      2. TIMETRAVELER2 profile image85
        TIMETRAVELER2posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        Since Google considers HP a content farm and is really going after what they consider to be "spam" (ie terrible abuse of advertisement use", it might be a good idea to remove all affiliate links from every single article here to see how doing this affects the site's overall ranking).  This bay sound brash and probably nobody will want to do it, but if we continue to have these subtle problems with affiliate advertising I feel they could bring the entire site to its knees.

        Google viewing an entire site as spammy is what brought other sites to their knees, and if we continue with this practice, we will go down, too.  So while removing ads will hurt some people financially, is it not better to do this than to wind up with nothing?  All the SEO  and good content in the world will not repair a major image problem with Google.  Just sayin'

        1. jimmythejock profile image82
          jimmythejockposted 9 years agoin reply to this

          Fair point, TT, could be the answer after all if we just keep the Google ads maybe Google would fall in love with us again.

          1. Suzanne Day profile image93
            Suzanne Dayposted 9 years agoin reply to this

            I believe that since Google is making a fair packet out of Adwords, Adsense is not going away anytime soon. But spam will as that seems to be the direction in which Google is heading - ie best user experience and all that...

        2. janshares profile image93
          jansharesposted 9 years agoin reply to this

          TIME, I recall when HP was going through something similar with Google, maybe a year and a half ago. Staff told us to decrease the number of links on our hubs, including ads. Does anyone else remember that? I remember going through all my hubs and deleting a few, including those separation/divider bars. I think it did help. Maybe this is a good idea, not to delete all but to delete some.

        3. carny profile image92
          carnyposted 9 years agoin reply to this

          I'm not an expert by any means, but I thought using subdomains was supposed to solve the issue somewhat? Google's Blogger uses subdomains, and holy cow, there are tons of promotional, pornographic, and generally shady blogs in there. But good blogs can still rank quite well despite that.

    2. aa lite profile image84
      aa liteposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      To be honest, the thing that would help the most, isn't improving the quality of the hubs, but suggesting low competition topics/ keywords that would get traffic.

      I know that an attempt was made with the 'exclusive' titles, but I, and many other hubbers were very disappointed in them.  Then it emerged that they weren't keyword researched. 

      Now I can imagine that keyword research on an industrial scale would be expensive and difficult, but it would be great if it could be tried.

      I think many people spend time targeting impossible keywords that they will never beat the competition for.  Other people write without really thinking how their hubs would be searched for, without really asking whether anybody searches for their keywords.  Sometimes these are very good writers, but they are wasting their talents (at least from a traffic, money making point of view).

      I don't know whether Jaaxy has some kind of corporate deal where you could get it for the whole site.  Actually I'm not sure I like it, I've never used it and it seems to me to be geared mostly towards commercial topics.  Just trying out ideas. 

      It seems to me that E-how or demand media also do something like that.  I would hate to be prescribed titles to write on, but I would love being offered a large selection of titles that had been kw researched.  They would need to cover lots of different topics, so the project would be difficult.

      And I suspect if people wrote on more search friendly topics, traffic would really improve.

      Although I think the option of picking one's own topics if one so wished should remain.

      1. janderson99 profile image56
        janderson99posted 10 years agoin reply to this

        I agree - Better Topics, Niches, Titles is the key to success.
        This is the 'necessary' part - the rest is the 'sufficient' part.
        A 'Plain Jane' Hub will succeed with a fabulous title and niche.
        A Stellar hub will fail in a niche area for which it cannot compete. especially with a poor title.
        The key to traffic is niche selection and crafting the topic, quality is secondary.
        Here is my suggestions:

        1###  HP has a vast data set of keywords used in searches to find hubs. I suggest that HP gather all these and give each author a summary by traffic. Most of these would not be relevant generally as most authors write in narrow topics. These keyword phases appear for each hub under search term data. This could be used to identify opportunities for additional hubs within the same areas.

        2### HP should use its vast array of information to produce a rank for each topic in terms of likelihood for success.  That is generate a ranking out of 100 for each of the existing topics as a guide to saturation and opportunities. It could also list number of articles for each topic category. Sure there are some limited opportunities withing saturated topics but this would help. It would also identify gaps and opportunities.

        3#### Stop de-indexing hubs that get traffic and are earning good money because of a couple of typos - just plain silly. You send people emails when an old hub fails the quality test. Why not give authors 3-4 days to fix the hub before it gets de-indexed. Wouldn't that be a lot nicer to the community. Surely there is nothing lost by a short delay which avoids the risk that the hub will lose its traffic because it has been idled. This is a good way to protect traffic and be kinder to the community. Why risk killing traffic unnecessarily?

        1. angryelf profile image89
          angryelfposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          This isn't 100% true, because Google does want quality content. The key to gaining traffic lies within keywords AND quality smile However, neither will matter if you do not perform SEO if it is a competitive niche. You just have to narrow down extremely far. For example, if you want to write about planting irises, awesome! But there are going to be millions of competitors, with sites like Home Depot or famous gardening sites that will overrank you no matter what. In order to rank, you'd have to tweak it some, such as "Planting Healthy Blue Irises in [state]". Use this phrase once or twice within the entire hub. That is the key to success smile I know I don't have many followers/hubs/accolades yet; but I've been writing LSI content for SEO purposes for big name companies for two years (including one US-wide online legal services provider you've probably seen on TV). Which is why I don't have much here; I was selling my talent. Be glad this is not offered by hubpages; because when you learn how to target properly, there will be MUCH less competition for you. Plus, for those who are spamming, it will only significantly increase bad posts. I'm willing to help those struggling with KW research, but many don't reach very far outside of hubpages to learn about it. Also, non featured hubs are deindexed to protect the rank of hubpages which IN TURN protects the rank of high quality articles by other writers. If all of the hubs aren't great in the eyes of google, hubpages gets shot down in rank taking a toll on everyone's traffic. Indexing occurs within a few hours as well, so it doesn't really hurt traffic. Hubpages has those requirements in the top right because it is currently EXACTLY what google is looking to rank; media rich, lots of words! smile

          1. Mark Ewbie profile image80
            Mark Ewbieposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            Tell me.  You have been here 2 years and have 1,000 views.

            How good is your KW advice I wonder?

            How about doing the successful thing FIRST and then offering advice.  When you have a million plus views say.

            1. angryelf profile image89
              angryelfposted 10 years agoin reply to this

              I'm not focusing 100% here, sweetheart. I've got other places to write as well; including clients. I also own my own websites where I do low comp niche articles, this is more for fun research and recreational hubs. I even have some that rank on the first page and have NO seo performed on them. You do not look like you have room to speak, and you also have your accolades hidden. 1,000 of my views have come in the last 9 days or so, and 450 from one hub I posted and left about 8 months ago (a very, very seldom searched keyword with no competition) that was in all technicality crap since it was an experiment. Tweaked it recently, and I know it'll perform much better now. Now tell me: How much traffic are you receiving from Google? Over half of mine came from it.... Oh, and considering I was trained by some amazing SEO pro's, I'm pretty sure I'm very well equipped.

              1. psycheskinner profile image82
                psycheskinnerposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                You lost me at "sweetheart". Tone, much?

                1. angryelf profile image89
                  angryelfposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                  I use sweetheart to address many people (That's the way we talk here). But in this case it was used to establish that he's ill equipped for judgment. Mark here is criticizing someone who is offering advice, yet this individual has no idea of everything else I have achieved outside of here; just because I've only been active here for a week means nothing. I created my account years ago; but never used it because I didn't like what it had to offer at that time. I just threw something up and left.

                  1. HollieT profile image82
                    HollieTposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                    Angryelf, sweetheart, lots and lots of people give advice. However, for the most part, they will be ignored when they can only "talk" about their success and not demonstrate how successful they are. Some people are just full of hot air, and that's the way it is.

                  2. psycheskinner profile image82
                    psycheskinnerposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                    If you want to sound professional you might want to drop that habit.

              2. Mark Ewbie profile image80
                Mark Ewbieposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                Yeah right.  I do not believe a word of what you say.  Clear enough?

                1. angryelf profile image89
                  angryelfposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                  That's great, you're entitled to your own opinion. But as adults, are we not morally required to respect one another? As I had posted; I've only been active for a week, yesssss my profile was created two years ago. Did you know I DID achieve all those accolades in the last week? Also, our hubber score, it's the same if you noticed  smile So why didn't you just ask me what I know, before judging? I like to help, but never spoon feed. To each their own, but I'm positively glad I'm not one to take jabs at people.

                  1. Mark Ewbie profile image80
                    Mark Ewbieposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                    If you think Hubber score means anything at all then I suspect your advice is not worth having.  But hey, by all means share openly your secrets of writing about Irises in Detroit - a rather old technique I believe, but I'm no expert.

                    I would think that waiting until your undoubted expertise pays off - in terms of at least 100,000 views might be better.  You might scrape some more gullibles that way.

                  2. aa lite profile image84
                    aa liteposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                    You've only been active for a week, really?  At least 3 of your hubs were published at least 2 months ago, and another 1 published at least 7 weeks ago, according to your profile.

                    Tell the other one patronising sweetheart.

              3. aa lite profile image84
                aa liteposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                For such an SEO expert, the advice you offer is pretty standard.  You might have been trained by amazing SEO pro's, but this kind of stuff can be found pretty much all over the net.

                I'm not saying any of it is untrue, but the trick is not to tell people that they need to find good niche keywords.  Pretty much everybody knows that.  The trick is figuring out how to find those keywords, and how to know whether you can rank for it or not.

                As to Google wanting quality, that is what they've been saying for years.  I have no problem with that, but, when you look at the SERPs, do you really see very high quality sites ranking on page 1?

      2. Barbara Kay profile image72
        Barbara Kayposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        This idea sounds expensive, but we'd all write a lot more articles. It is hard to find article ideas that don't already have impossible competition.

        I think the idea that janderson99 has about giving notice to fix the hub is excellent. It wouldn't cost that much either.

      3. brakel2 profile image74
        brakel2posted 10 years agoin reply to this

        I started using Jaaxy keyword tool recently and wondered what people thought of it.  After using your free ones, it costs money. I think the first level is $19 monthly. As I am in process of writing my first article using it, I hope it is successful.

        1. Writer Fox profile image34
          Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          Free is fine, but I personally wouldn't pay to use it.

        2. janderson99 profile image56
          janderson99posted 10 years agoin reply to this

          In my opinion Jaaxy is very good and is probably worth the cost. I have yet to find a better one at this price.

          1. brakel2 profile image74
            brakel2posted 10 years agoin reply to this

            Thanks for your input. That is not a bad price.

    3. profile image88
      Robbie C Wilsonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Hi Paul,
                    I think that the current QAP drive to improve the overall status of HubPages is great. I also like the tips that were recently added when you create a hub that gives you advice about adding new capsules and how many words you should write and pictures you should add.

      One thing I noticed today that would be nice is that you cannot currently add a photo of your hub to the Link capsule. If you could do that, this capsule would be more useful.

      I also like RM Crayne's suggestion of allowing feedback as most of us I suspect write and proof read our articles entirely on our own, so another pair of eyes (should be) welcome. The feedback / criticism should be hidden and I agree on the idea of opting in. An accolade for those who write good criticism would also be nice.

    4. Susana S profile image90
      Susana Sposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I think if HP could provide more indepth "help" pages relating to writing for your reader, formating for a web audience, assessing competition before writing, title writing, using hooks to engage your reader - that kind of thing - more people would get more traffic.

      1. lobobrandon profile image89
        lobobrandonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        Well, I said it before and I'm gonna say it again. Getting more traffic is definitely a good thing. But what you'll all are missing (most of you) is the fact that the traffic we currently receive is useless!

        Thanks to the loads of ads that we see all across our pages people are bouncing off now more than ever, my bounce rate is around 82% and I've heard of popular hubbers who have bounce rates in the upper 90's. Well, I do interlink and I'm constantly checking my stats on Analytics the live overview and I see them moving from hub to hub. Not sure how the bounce rate is that high, but it is.

        Rather than trying to get little from millions of visits, why not focus on getting a lot from the thousands that we're already receiving? Optimize the site to give the viewers what they want! not what we want. Of course we need the ads in order to pay for all the hosting, staff salaries and I bet there are heaps of other expenditures. But, don't you'll think it would be wise to modify thing for the good of the viewer and see what happens?

        I'll be more than happy if you'll can have some sort of A/B testing to see what works well. I already suggested about making the Amazon products look better (But what was done was making the buy at amazon bigger. Instead focus on the image, make that bigger it works marvels (Speaking from experience).

        Do this one thing and I can guarantee you'll that you would see an enormous increase in revenue and then once that's all sorted out you could worry about the other ads and where to place them. The first thing that I personally feel that needs to be done is remove the top header ad. You'll know that it's not good and looks crazy and hence don't show it to us hubbers when we're signed in. So, what's the point of presenting the hubs that way to our guests - the visitors?

        Grammar checks can be done on word (basic grammar), no software is going to be able to think like a human (not yet at least) so, there's no point in wasting your scarce resources on something of such a scale.

        My amazon sales from HP are doing fine and my HP ad program is quite good too, so I'm not complaining and saying that what you'll are doing isn't working. Just saying that it's inefficient at the moment and together change can happen. Don't let this be a revenue sharing site where anything and everything is published, make it a resource where people would want to come in order to find helpful articles, make them want to return to hub pages the way the return to any other popular site out there.

        As per quantcast HP is one of the top 100 sites in the world (73 if I'm not mistaken), but how many people type in into their browsers when they need to look for something?

        1. Susana S profile image90
          Susana Sposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          Did you mean to reply to me?

          1. lobobrandon profile image89
            lobobrandonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            Ooh not you Susana. Talking to HP in general.

    5. Millionaire Tips profile image90
      Millionaire Tipsposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I like the idea of getting private feedback from Hubbers about things that are wrong with a hub.

      I also like the idea of getting feedback from staff.  Just like Wrylit gave us a quick once over and told us what we should work on, I think feedback like that from staff would be very helpful.  We are all trying to be successful, and I know I am missing some important part of the puzzle.

      Sunforged 60 day training could also be duplicated by staff.  There wouldn't be a limit of Hubbers since they can visit each other to provide feedback, but it would give more step by step instructions on how to improve things.

      Another thing others haven't mentioned is more help with copycats.  I think some of my traffic disappeared because of sites that copied our hubs.  I really would like to be told when my site has been copied.  I understand that I would have to pursue it, but at least I will be on the case faster.

      I'm not sure a grammar check is a good value for the investment.  I use Word, and I think that free online software is available that lets us do that.  I also think that there are things that a spell check and grammar checker cannot do - things like organization, focus, reader engagement, etc. - that are much more important.

      Suggestions from other Hubbers is something I would love to have for my hubs.  I could correct minor nits, and bigger issues. And once I get a few of these suggestions going, I might be able to see what kinds of issues seem to be the biggest problem for my hubs and work on those specifically.

      You might consider giving the mTurkers a space to write a sentence - completely optional on their part - if something particularly stands out to them, they can let us know.

    6. Writer Fox profile image34
      Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Traffic will improve when HubPages more closely follows Google's Webmaster Guidelines.  These are just a few improvements that HubPages should make:

      1.  Give the option for authors to choose to 'NoFollow' a link and require them to do this for affiliates and advertorials.  Traffic will improve when HubPages discontinues its practice of webspam as defined by Google. Please see my post about this at:
      2.  For images, provide an 'Alt Attribute' choice that is different from the 'Caption'.  The 'Alt Attribute' needs to describe the actual picture while the caption should relate the picture to the content.  Google image search uses the 'Alt Attribute' and traffic from image searches will improve when Hub authors can write an Alt text that is different from the caption beneath the image. (The 'Alt attribute' should not be visible to users except on the mouse-over.) See the explanation here:

      3. Add a canonical URL tag referencing the URL to the header of the page.

      4. Google states: "Every page of your site should offer significant value to your audience."  In light of this, NoIndex the entire forum, Questions and Answers, and other content that is not useful to those outside of the HubPages community.  Doing this will focus search engines' 'crawl priority' on Hubs and improve ranking in search results.

      5.  Limit the number of links on a single page.  Google will not crawl more than 100 links on a single page, and that includes links in headers, footers, side bars, links in comments back to Hubbers' subdomains, etc.  This is particularly important on the subdomain landing page.  Limit this to a list of no more than 75 Hubs, adding links to additional pages listing no more than 75 Hubs, etc.  The same applies to Topic pages.

      6. Google requires forum signatures (avatar and Hubber name) and commentator's links to be NoFollow.  Without this attribute, every comment made on a Hub gives a spam link back to someone's profile and dilutes the PageRank that should flow elsewhere.

      7. Limit the 'Description Tag' (Summary) to 157 characters (including spaces).  This is all that will show on search engine results and Hubbers need to place the important text and keywords describing the Hub's content within this space. (HubPages currently sets the limit at 199.)

      8.  Remove the date which appears on the 'Description Tag' in search results. The date should not be displayed for pages which are not blog postings or news.  Depending on the date, HubPages removes up to 27% of the Hub's description by substituting the date for valuable keywords and words which encourage a searcher to click-through to the Hub.

      9. Stop placing so many ads 'above-the-fold' on Hubs. 

      10.  Buy PPC ads to bring traffic to interior Topic pages.

      1. profile image65
        Jmiller17posted 10 years agoin reply to this

        Great and Thorough! Hopefully some at Hubpages reads this

    7. Sharicey profile image60
      Shariceyposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I think I would benefit from all the suggestions already made. But I was also wondering and I'm not sure if this was already said( forgive me) but better feedback on why a hub is not featured due to quality. Recently I had a hub not featured due to quality and it is one that I consider to be well written. Of course it can be improved but I even think that the grammar is good. Grammar is my weakness but I'm trying to improve. I find that feedback is important because otherwise it just seems like an arbitrary decision.

    8. Rock_nj profile image92
      Rock_njposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Everything except suggesting edits.  I never found those sort of tools to be very helpful.  Grammar checking would be helpful, especially now that Google is putting more emphasis on the quality of articles.  More image and media support would also be helpful, as would better formatting control.  Breaking Hubs into sections isn't a problem with current capsules; however, there are spacing issues.  It would be nice to make the capsules fit together better.

    9. paradigmsearch profile image60
      paradigmsearchposted 10 years agoin reply to this

    10. Glimmer Twin Fan profile image96
      Glimmer Twin Fanposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I would love to see more help with titles.  I was under the impression that exclusives were researched, but from reading some of the comments here, that may not be the case. 

      I have tried to use the title tuner, but frankly I just don't understand it.

      I would also suggest that HubPages do more with promoting more hubs on social media like Pinterest and Twitter.  I enjoy seeing the facebook posts and I frequently go to a hub when I see it shared. 

      Many companies now have their own Pinterest pages and it would be just one more means of getting hubs out there.  Perhaps create boards that correspond with the topics sections here on HP and start pinning hubs that pass the QAP.

      Thanks for asking.

    11. CrescentSkies profile image65
      CrescentSkiesposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      More search engine optimization options would be nice. My rankings have been low ever since hubpages started their own subpar optimization tactics.

    12. KDeus profile image94
      KDeusposted 10 years agoin reply to this


      I'd love to see the ability to place anchor links within an article to jump from one part of the article to another.  I understand limiting the ability to add html as it presents the possibility of injecting inappropriate code, but possibly the ability to add shortcode to create the anchor links.

      Another thing that I would suggest is with regard to the integration with Pinterest. On the Internet, in general, when the "Pin It" bookmarklet is clicked, the ability to select your image featured on Pinterest is given, however, on hubpages, the photo always defaults to the first image posted, which may not be the one that should be pinned. I've tried using the Bookmarklet in my browser on hubpages, but there is a conflict between the script and the one on hubpages, so it results in not allowing any pins until the page is refreshed.

      Thank you for asking us!

      1. janderson99 profile image56
        janderson99posted 10 years agoin reply to this

        If you hover over any image a little 'Pin It' button pops up in the bottom right corner of the image !

    13. bizboon profile image42
      bizboonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      How do I post a forum question?

      1. HollieT profile image82
        HollieTposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        It's complex but doable, just do what you have been doing with a title.

        1. bizboon profile image42
          bizboonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          Thanks. I posted it once, but can't figure out how to do it again.

          1. HollieT profile image82
            HollieTposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            I've just realised that my response sounded really unhelpful. I honestly didn't mean to be, I just thought you were messing about. Apologies smile

      2. Writer Fox profile image34
        Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        Go here and click on the green bar at the top right which says 'Start a New Discussion':

        1. bizboon profile image42
          bizboonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          Thank you very much.  This very helpful.

    14. reagu profile image65
      reaguposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Perhaps a set of tools that's friendly to sites like Pinterest and WeHeartIt. The only thing I can think of at the moment is improving image presentation/UI. Maybe something along the way Flickr do their UI. The reason for this is to make mobile and tablet users feel comfortable when navigating through Hubpages. Many users coming from Pinterest and WeHeartIt do not necessarily want to read articles, but browse images.

    15. bgpappa profile image77
      bgpappaposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      It would be neat if you stopped arbitrarily unfeaturing hubs. Not that it bothers me, when there is no explanation and no real reason, I simply delete and move to another site.

    16. WestelCS profile image60
      WestelCSposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Though, I am new to the hub but have read somewhere that traffic will improve with HubPages, if one  closely follows Google's Webmaster Guidelines.  The new Hubpages Ad Program is basically traffic based and this is greatly in demand.

    17. relache profile image70
      relacheposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      As someone who can do all the above, I want HubPages to spend more time and energy making the really weak content go away.  UnFeaturing may hide poor content from search engines, but it does not hide it in the least from anyone actually using the site, and the actions of those visitors is what Google is staring at.

      Just putting energy into building things that are new and never fixing the stuff that wasn't working was the Squidoo methodology.  PLEASE DO NOT GO DOWN THAT ROAD.

      I see HubPages starting to take a position of trying to get new content on the site, and then fixing it after it gets here.  That is an incredibly bad position to get this website into.  I've also seen some really serious shifts in editing and moderation standards on this site over the last six months, and while changes can be good, being sloppy about enforcing standards, having moderators who clearly are not working to the same standards, and not keeping the FAQs/LC updated to how the site works are all eroding efforts to improve the site.

      The part this summer where the prolific American writer with duplicated content was allowed to keep her duplicated material up and running on HubPages while her articles were still published elsewhere, and her account here was protected and allowed to remain fully-functional while her content got taken down elsewhere was appalling.  I permanently lost some respect for you, Paul E, for allowing that to unfold that way.

      - Tighten up your standards on the front end, not the back end. *facepalm*
      - Get those years-old ads about how much money can be made here writing off of sites like  They make us look bad and ring the dinner bell for the lowest-common denominator content spammers.
      - Freaking get on top of the spam topics on this site.  Form a team, make it their job and get them crawling the site.  Waiting for the community to report issues has never gotten HubPages out in front of this problem.  You've been chasing it since year one and it's time to close the gap already.
      - You let a lot of people that Google AdSense wouldn't touch with a ten-ft-pole learn to write here.  For months or years even.  You want to put in all the effort trying to teach those folks to write?  Build a second site and put all the learners there.  People who graduate get to have their content moved to the real site.

      1. aesta1 profile image93
        aesta1posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        Totally support this but one of the things I recently did was read. You suggested this in one of your hubs and I gave it more patience this time. The learning from this reading made editing work really easy and with new edits, I hope to gain more traffic. I still need to read more. I have not really done much reading of Help pages in any site I had been before. Now, I'm convinced how helpful they are.

        The continuous warning be it for broken links or over promotional or poor quality pictures are most welcome. They were never mistakes from my experience and you've made them easy to spot. There are expected standards and I hope we keep enforcing this and even raising the bar.

    18. Maina Ndungu profile image93
      Maina Ndunguposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      I would highly recommend any suggestions for making improvements. However, I wouldn't agree with any attempts to physically edit a hub without the author's consent. Sometimes, vital keywords are difficult to pinpoint.
      Secondly, proofreading softwares are helpful but not necessarily accurate. If you would employ any sort of help to the author, let it be just an aid whereby the author has the final word.

    19. AaronBurton profile image61
      AaronBurtonposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      Very good question. I think hubpages is fine the way it is. One thing I would like to see is more information on my traffic. It says where the traffic is coming from but doesn't say which hubs are generating the traffic. But other than that i LOVE this place!

      1. brakel2 profile image74
        brakel2posted 9 years agoin reply to this

        You can find more info on traffic in Google Analytics. Check the learning center for more help on Analytics.

  2. janshares profile image93
    jansharesposted 10 years ago

    It would be helpful to get feedback from staff as to how we're doing. For example, specifics about a particular hub, our subdomain, or our profile that would validate whether we're on the right track or make us aware of where improvements are needed. I assume staff does not comment on hubs but I think it would be helpful if it was done randomly on a consistent basis.

    I think feedback would be very beneficial to new hubbers and save a lot of time and efforts, especially if newbies were doing something incorrectly for an indefinte period that goes unchecked. They end up thinking that they're doing okay, only to find later that they could have been doing a lot better, if they'd only known.

  3. Sherry Hewins profile image92
    Sherry Hewinsposted 10 years ago

    I think a proofreading service for grammar, spelling, punctuation and so forth is a good idea. I don't have anyone to provide a second pair of eyes, and it can be more difficult to see your own mistakes.

    Suggested edits would be nice too, as long as it's at the request of the author, and they are only suggestions. I think it would be interesting to see how HubPages thinks our hubs should be.

    1. GA Anderson profile image88
      GA Andersonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Sherry, here's a proof reading trick that seems to work well for most folks.

      Before you hit the publish button - wait! You may have proofed it a dozen times getting ready to publish, but there is a reason why you may still miss mistakes.

      When you proof something that is still fresh in your memory - your mind will see what it expects to see.
      So that that sentence that should have said they said the and your mind skipped write over it because it knew what should have been there.

      So, when you finish a piece, close it and move on. Wait at least a few hours, overnight is better, then come back and PRINT IT OUT. It will be a lot easier to spot typos and bad grammar with the content on paper and your mind not pre-filled with what it is supposed to say.

      Contrary to Wilderness' reluctance to waste printer ink and paper - it is worth the effort. You will be surprised at the the thes you will catch - after 3 previous proofs.

      ps, the typos and redundancies were intentional representations of common mistakes that escape in-progress proof readings.

    2. HollieT profile image82
      HollieTposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      GA's right, wait a while before publishing. Another tip is to read it out loud as opposed to reading it in your head. It's harder to scan and you have to read it properly, hence, you'll pick up more typos that way.

  4. vocalcoach profile image93
    vocalcoachposted 10 years ago

    First of all, let me say that Hubpages  has been helping me to improve my hubs which improve my traffic by letting me know which of my hubs are featured and which need to be revised.  But lately I've noticed a big drop in my traffic which is somewhat discouraging.

    I've always had trouble with SEO so getting help with this would obviously improve my traffic.

    And maybe more options for sharing such as restoring g+?

    What about some type of program that would scan hubs to point out weaknesses (something like the amazon and ebay alerts reminding writers to use only 2.)

    I'd be happy to lend my services for correcting spelling and grammar on hubs smile

  5. WryLilt profile image89
    WryLiltposted 10 years ago

    It's been discussed for years and I even remember a staff member mentioning that it may be in the works.

    Allowing hubbers to leave private "suggestion notes" on hubs they visit (as an optional feature that you can turn on/off, and for members only). This means it's member driven, too, so unlike the suggestion of staff review, members can help out as little or as much as they want and it won't be taking out more time from staff hours.

    1. rmcrayne profile image90
      rmcrayneposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I think such a feature is a great idea.  I discovered HubPages (over 3 years ago) after joining my local Writer's Guild.  I quickly learned that constructive comments, which were an integral part of WG, were generally frowned upon by the masses at HP.  Everyone was so busy giving sappy encouragement to fellow hubbers.  While this was overall a nice, positive energy, I really would have liked getting constructive comments (and at times got a more than little tired of all the sap on the site). 

      This is not to say that there were never constructive comments from any hubbers.  However, those that did give constructive comments on hubs, or in the forums were quickly castigated as “haters”, and a Calvary of warm and fuzzy hubbers would then slather on the praise, even if the hub or hubber in question were not praise-worthy. 

      I'd guess that the HP masses still would have an old fashioned meltdown over constructive comments, and much prefer the warm and fuzzy ones.  Maybe instead of a feature you could turn off, it should be a feature that you have to read a discription of, and opt to turn on.

      1. WryLilt profile image89
        WryLiltposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        Yes I can see people being whingy about it. So definitely something where you'd need a disclaimer, and proper info about what it is. And turning on sounds good. Sometimes leaving a comment seems too public and not everyone has email contact enabled.

      2. Barbara Kay profile image72
        Barbara Kayposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        Sometimes you see a good writer with an incorrect spelling or typo and everything else is great I personally would like it pointed out to me.

    2. tillsontitan profile image81
      tillsontitanposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      That's a great idea!  Sometimes you see a spelling error but don't want to publicly announce it and just don't have time to send an email.  I know I appreciate it when someone tells me of an error I have, but your suggestion would make it easier to do and I think would benefit many.

    3. profile image0
      RTalloniposted 9 years agoin reply to this

      This could be a really good idea.  HP could reserve the right to ban people for misusing the option, members could benefit in several ways.

  6. LeanMan profile image80
    LeanManposted 10 years ago

    How about a mentoring system similar to the apprentice program - select some of your best hubbers - run a system similar to the apprenticeship program and give the mentors a "cut" of their students earnings for a 12 month period as an incentive to help.. I am sure there would be many that would enjoy to do that - It would be beneficial for both the mentors and the students and would help you to improve the site quicker without hiring extra staff and costing you huge amounts up front.
    It would be far quicker for HP staff to give training to a dozen willing hubbers and a curriculum to run through, then give each mentor a dozen students for 3 months. Easier than HP staff trying to work with a few hundred apprentices directly and will cost you very little up front.
    Things like this have happened in the past such as Sunforged's 60 day challenge which really helped many hubbers even if they were not officially sanctioned by HP.


    I'm with Wilderness and a few others - give people the QAP scores for their hubs, fully broken down as it would help people to identify what they need to work on and what they should be truly proud of.

    Yes I know you will get a million and one emails every day saying that hub XYZ should have scored a 7 and not a 6 and so forth but it should help those that really want to improve their hubs.


    Hubber score - make it transparent or at least separate what is derived from hub quality and site activity as they are two very different metrics and should not be mixed in my mind..

    Otherwise - a better spelling and grammar check for those who type direct into HP would be helpful for some.


    I also agree with hiring the guy with the baseball bat to pop around and visit the guys at Google!

  7. aa lite profile image84
    aa liteposted 10 years ago

    There has already been a lot of discussion about giving Hubbers their Mturk scores and why that is difficult at the moment, so I think we're beating a dead horse here.

    However, I have a slightly related suggestion which should be easier to implement, and that would be to show more "benchmarking hubs" so we could see what a 6 looks like vs an 8 or a 9 or even (dare I say it) a 10.

    I know there are examples given in the instructions of how to rate, but I think there are very few of them.  They are very restricted in topic, I think one is a recipe hub, so what it shows might not be that relevant to people who write different content.  I think if we had examples of recipe, how-to, product reviews, facts about......etc. that might be more useful.

    As an extra bonus (which would take some work), if there could be a review of the benchmark hubs, the good points, the bad points, why it got the score it did.  This could provide a useful resource for us, to see how to write an "8"

  8. EricDockett profile image97
    EricDockettposted 10 years ago

    I've had a few things on my HP wishlist for some time.  I guess now is the chance to speak up!  Most of it has to do with reader experience.

    1. I'd love to see a table of contents capsule.  For those of us who write longer Hubs (and especially since we're now encouraged to write longer Hubs), it might keep readers from hitting the back button too quickly if they can jump right to the section they are interested in.  It seems on some platforms this also helps with search visibility and ranking. 

    2. I'd like an improved link tool, where we can choose to have the link open in a new window or replace the currently open window.  Both options have advantages in certain situations, but I really dislike the current setup where readers are booted off my page when they click a link.  Maybe forcing a reader to another page helps improve certain metrics (bounce rate, exit ???) but I don't think it's good visitor experience. 

    3.  Bigger, prettier amazon images.  Lobobrandon mentioned this above, and I remember when he brought it up a few months ago.  I scratch my head over this one a bit, though.  Do search engines see images in Amazon capsules as images, or just as part of an ad?  If it's the latter, and if it causes Hubbers to use fewer real images and other media in favor of the amazon capsules, that could be a bad thing.  However, used wisely it would make the Hubs look nicer and increase click-through, and that's a very good thing. 

    4. I'd like some control over the "Discover More Hubs" that appear at the bottom of my Hub.  Currently, I include related Hubs at the end of each Hub, hoping the reader will continue on to another page on my subdomain.  But the links with the images that are automatically put there sure look nicer.  If there are 8 slots, I'd like the ability to plug in up to 8 of my Hubs, or those of some other Hubber I admire.  I guess maybe that opens things up to people plugging unrelated Hubs into the capsule, but surely that could be dealt with using some form of swift and brutal punishment. 

    Ideally, it would be nice to see a capsule where I could plug related Hubs (with image icons) into my Hub anywhere I want.  I'd settle for just the end of the Hub.  Most importantly, though, this capsule should appear BEFORE all the ads at the bottom of the Hub. 

    That's all I got . . . for now.  smile

    1. Writer Fox profile image34
      Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I make a Table of Contents for my longer Hubs.

      Basically what you do is find the module you want to link to by viewing the Page Source. (I usually link to a picture or a line graphic on my Hub.) When you find the module you want, create a URL like this:

      Hub URL Goes Here#mod_22849676

      Then just choose the anchor text you want for the Table of Contents. Linking to a module with an H2 Tag (Hub, image or video title) can help with ranking if you use keywords properly and only use H2 Tags sparingly.

      There's also a Hub about how to do it, but the instructions look a little complicated:

      1. EricDockett profile image97
        EricDockettposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        Yeah, I know about that.  But it's kind of a "work around" instead of a capsule designed just for that purpose. 

        Same with the links opening in a new window.  I know there's a HTML workaround, but it would be nice if it was easier to do.

        I get itchy when I start trying to understand coding.  It's part of the gig so I do what I gotta do, but I don't like it.

        1. Writer Fox profile image34
          Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          I agree.  It would be much less time-consuming to have 'point-and-click' coding for the Table of Contents and I think more people would use it if that were the case.

          It really does have great SEO value for longer articles.  (Think Wikipedia.)

          I also agree that outbound links should open in a new window, which would be easy for HP to put in the link capsule along with the choice to NoFollow.

  9. ologsinquito profile image82
    ologsinquitoposted 10 years ago

    Hi Paul,

    This is really nice of you to ask for our input. My wish list, in no particular order, would be a table of contents capsule, the ability to send private messages, some sort of SEO co-op where we can promote one another's work and maybe HP helping with promotion, such as sending a Twitter feed of all new articles. Thanks so much.

  10. Marcy Goodfleisch profile image83
    Marcy Goodfleischposted 10 years ago

    Paul -  Thank you for putting this question out to the community. 

    Most of the examples you list relate to quality issues. But since your question was how HP can help us improve traffic, I'd like to suggest some other ideas, too:

    It would help us tremendously if the site could get behind some of our efforts to tackle scrapers.  We go through the same steps, over and over, and none of us has the clout HP has, or the 'ear' you may have with Google, hosting firms and other places that inhibit our traffic when we are scraped.

    I recognize that we hold the copyrights, but that should not stop HP from stepping in as well.  Since scraping and copying often takes entire sections from the site, this gives HP a platform for addressing this at a broader level.  It would particularly be helpful when the SAME PEOPLE scrape repeatedly (they should be shut down, forever).

    And, HP can help when we see a decline in traffic that never returns after the scraper is caught.  There's some sort of longterm penalty that kicks in when OUR work is copied - we are downgraded, and it lasts for months (maybe permanently). 

    The DMCA was put in place to protect writers, not those who copy.  If Google attaches a ranking penalty to hubs that have been copied in the past, they are punishing the victims.  HubPages has more access than we do to Google, and management can help tremendously by helping to address this.

    Also - HubPages is in a position to point out the inequity of punishing good quality content simply because it appears on the type of site Google (and other search engines) target due to issues of bad content.  I fully support the idea of improving content overall (in fact, I would be even harsher than the QAP standards allow).  But I also feel there may be a legal argument that punishing writers who produce good content because of the site could have potential for a class action suit. 

    I'm not an attorney, but from what I know about class action suits, if an entire class of people (a group of writers) is being harmed by an action (Google's decision to reduce our rankings based on our participation in a site like HP), this can be pursued legally.  Google is affecting our livelihoods, and that type of harm is part of court cases every single day.

    HubPages has, I believe, a stake in this, a right to act on it, and more leverage with Google than we do.

    Just wanted to share these ideas in response to the OP about improving traffic.

  11. KoffeeKlatch Gals profile image75
    KoffeeKlatch Galsposted 10 years ago

    I would really love to see us have a grammar check.

  12. brakel2 profile image74
    brakel2posted 10 years ago

    I would like a tutorial about linking. My hubs have many links showing where to find more good information on the subject. It includes links to my resources. Is this a waste of time   and maybe a penalty?  It is not spammy linking.

    1. Writer Fox profile image34
      Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Google rewards you for linking out to quality, relevant resources, and it is one of the things Google's own human raters look for in a webpage.

  13. psycheskinner profile image82
    psycheskinnerposted 10 years ago

    My personal opinion is that the technical aspects of creating text are my job as the writer.

    What I would like is more hints as to how to make or improve a hubs value as Google bait.  This might include topic suggestions that are based on keyword popularity, and the general area that caused a hub to fail QAP.

    1. Marcy Goodfleisch profile image83
      Marcy Goodfleischposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Well said, PS.  I agree - we should not be writing here if we are not skilled enough to do so without tutorials.  SEO is different - many writers came here after being published elsewhere, and are learning to publish on the Internet.  Of the two skills, being able to write coherently is more important to bring to the table.  A good writer can more easily be taught SEO strategies than a bad writer (who knows SEO) can be taught how to write.

      1. sallybea profile image94
        sallybeaposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        Asking for our input is much appreciated Paul. My wish list would include the following items:-
        I would like to see a grammar checker alongside the spell checker.
        Also the opportunity to place two images side by side for comparison purposes.
        Also the tweet buttons etc., placed back at the top of the page so that we don't have to scroll so far down a page to tweet.  It can be very time consuming if you want to tweet several Hubs at a time.
        The opportunity to have British Ads on our Hubs for Amazon and E-Bay instead of USA ones.
        Thanks very much.

  14. brakel2 profile image74
    brakel2posted 10 years ago

    Someone else talked about linking and being penalized for linking and losing traffic. Google just penalized for bad links. Can someone at least address this? It doesn't need a tutorial necessarily. I too have lost traffic. We each have our own needs. I appreciate You Paul for caring about our ideas

    1. janderson99 profile image56
      janderson99posted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Many of the Discover More Hubs links are clearly unrelated and are ruining the ranking of the pages. The author has no control over them as HP adds them to the bottom of the page. Please remove these junk links. What's the point if they are unrelated? Google penalises the author because it thinks he or she is trying to game the system. Time to remove them - Please.

      1. Susana S profile image90
        Susana Sposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        I think the discover more hubs can be problematic too. Sometimes I cringe when I see what's being linked to from my hub!

        Would love a way to edit those links so that I'm only endorsing pages that actually deserve it.

        Also - Maybe this is would be another way to help reduce the impact that cruddy stuff (that somehow passed QAP?) has on the site, as it would get less links, less visibility and less endorsement - Kind of like it being hidden in the background.

  15. Mark Ewbie profile image80
    Mark Ewbieposted 10 years ago

    HP should trust their authors more.  If a reasonably high-ranked author has set up Groups for a hub then don't put the other author related stuff on there at all.  Let the Hubber try to persuade their reader to visit their own group pages.  To retain them within the sub-domain.

    I think there is too much advertising.  Either reduce it across the board or allow your trusted authors to have some flexibility in the ads being displayed.

    If those floating adverts really do not share income I think that is rather unfair.  I would like the option to get rid of them.  Not just because of the income.  If they paid double I would still want rid.

    This is how you can 'reward' your trusted authors.  Let them have a little more control over how best to appeal to and retain their readers.

    1. WryLilt profile image89
      WryLiltposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Sorry Mark, I gotta disagree on the first point. Those bring a lot of traffic to me by putting my hubs on other people's hubs. Er I mean... They bring a lot of traffic to newbies! big_smile

      1. janderson99 profile image56
        janderson99posted 10 years agoin reply to this

        The trouble is that Panda is a 'one bad apple in the tub ruins the entire tub' so one set of bad unrelated links on one hub can lower the rank of an entire SUB and several may lower HP's rank as well. If there are errors, and there are many, then the damage is done by these bad apples.

        It's too much of a penalty to pay for a few extra reciprocal ones back, especially when they are placed right at the end of the article. {there are also issues about the quality and reputation if the links}.

        HP want hubbers to be in charge of their own destiny - these links stop SUBs  from being really independent. The collateral damage is too severe IMO.

        1. WryLilt profile image89
          WryLiltposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          True. But one of the promotional drawcards of HP was always the interlinking.

          1. profile image0
            DigbyAdamsposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            That was before Panda and the creation of subdomains. These were supposed to protect good content from the bad. It doesn't seem to be successful.

      2. Millionaire Tips profile image90
        Millionaire Tipsposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        I like the related hubs also. I think it is what makes HubPages more of a community instead of just a stand alone website.  I would prefer some tweaks.  I think the first two links should go to the author of the hub, especially if they have written a related article.  The other ones can be HubPages chosen but the author should have veto power to take one or two that are bad matches because they are unrelated, low quality, spammy, etc.

  16. psycheskinner profile image82
    psycheskinnerposted 10 years ago

    The "related search" box is a real sore point for me.  It is the only part of the Hubpages system that does not strike me as complete fair and reasonable.

    1. janderson99 profile image56
      janderson99posted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I agree - it is an open sore!

    2. Marcy Goodfleisch profile image83
      Marcy Goodfleischposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      +1000, and ditto on the unrelated 'other hubs' issue. 

      What would be the harm of getting rid of those two 'features' on the site and analyzing whether traffic improved?  You could test it for a period of several months to see if it is affecting Google rankings.  If it is, then you might be getting pennies and losing dollars by keeping them on the site.

  17. Greekgeek profile image80
    Greekgeekposted 10 years ago

    An advanced option (perhaps hidden by default) for experienced hubbers to add alt tags to images.

    Right now, the image's entire caption is fed into the alt tag. But that's not what an alt tag is for:

    1) For visually impaired web users to get a quick description of what the image is.
    2) For search engines to understand what the image is.

    Alt tags should be brief, and are usually a phrase or 2-4 word label.

    A caption is often commentary, rather than a descriptive like "small brown bat's nose", so it doesn't work as an alt tag.

    Proper alt tags give our images more chances to show up in Google and Bing Image Search and to help our pages' relevance for their topic, assuming that the photos are well-suited for the topic.

    1. Mark Ewbie profile image80
      Mark Ewbieposted 10 years agoin reply to this


  18. susi10 profile image96
    susi10posted 10 years ago

    I would like HubPages to make a system where they tell Hubbers how to get a passive income online by writing a certain number if Hubs, SEO, keyword research and more, for Hubbers that are willing to put in the time and effort.

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Good luck with that one!  Miss Cleo can probably do a better job with her crystal ball. big_smile

      1. susi10 profile image96
        susi10posted 10 years agoin reply to this

        Thanks, wilderness! smile

  19. Fiction Teller profile image60
    Fiction Tellerposted 10 years ago

    To be brutally honest...from the perspective of someone who learned quite a bit writing the help pages for a major university library....

    Access to a SINGLE concise, clear, exhaustive FAQ that answers ALL the  questions hubbers want to know about the content they produce here, so they will understand content guidelines, perhaps despite themselves!

    Currently, Hubbers who laboriously search out answers can find them; they're there. You have lots of documentation, almost too much.  You need to be able to reach lazier people or people with less time or people who are lost - or people like me, who've already invested a lot of time here and don't want to invest hours more doing "discovery" every time I write a hub just to get up to date.

    You've worked really hard at getting out lots of documentation.  Lots.  Mostly functionally organized according to an internal administrative logic (TOS, FAQ, Learning Center, Forum).  For a UGC site, you're still not thinking like your user.  Your documentation has been frankly weak since I started here 4 years ago, and it's just built on the same weakness.  Why is it weak?

    1) There is no single shortcut cheat-sheet condensing everything and linking to more extended answers.  There are SEVERAL shortcut pages.  It's like a hospital that has five lobbies.  You need to go through one lobby to get to your doctor, but...which one?  You need a single front lobby for content help.  And since your entire model is content, then that means your front lobby for help has to be more than:

    2) There are too many generalizations and not enough specifics.  Not just examples - you've improved a lot in that regard.  But specifics.  Yes, you can do this.  No, not this.  As for that - check with us on that.  Content on X and Y is absolutely forbidden.  Content on Z may be okay, in A, B, C circumstances.  For one way to do this, see: … suggestion 

    3) Your help pages lack browse-ability.  Take:

    A) It's badly organized.  It's too long and random and non-intuitive and it's hard work to find specific questions.   You mix upper level categories with specifics.
    B) The table of contents is too formally and back-end worded (" Publishing Rules & Policies" instead of the more compelling, "What am I Allowed and Not Allowed to Publish?"  It is also easy to miss because it's not in the first eye spot.
    C) You use qualifiers that confuse, like "Generally speaking." 

    4) Your forums are bloated because your documentation lacks.  Your forums are serving as either a last resort for help ("Help - I've searched everywhere and am overwhelmed") or a first resort for help ("Help - I can't find it instantly, and don't want to bother looking.")  They should not be needed for help at all, except for discovery of new questions nobody's asked yet.  Users should be able to navigate to instant help instantly.  If they end up on the forums, the response should be, "Hey, welcome!  You really should check out this page - it'll answer all your questions."  Instead, only the experts direct to help pages, because only the experts know where the pertinent pages are, because there is no easy, impressive central start place.

    It boils down to this:  Every time I want to know what HubPages' current policy is on something (especially specific stuff on self-promotion, multiple accounts, affiliate links, what kinds of links are allowed in profiles, how many links per capsule, etc.) I have to search in multiple places - I have to be highly motivated and already something of an expert on HubPages in the first place.  I love contributing content to websites that have the answers to all my questions in one place, so I can just quickly check I'm not breaking any rules if I have an idea to do something different.  I don't love contributing content to HubPages, because I know it will mean hours of updating myself on current guidelines and I'll end up having to post questions to the forums anyway.

    1. janshares profile image93
      jansharesposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      +1 I've been thinking this from day one.

  20. Doc Sonic profile image75
    Doc Sonicposted 10 years ago

    Thanks for seeking out this feedback. Here are my ideas:

    1) Titles, we are told, are possibly the single most important factor in attracting traffic. Help with finding topics and titles that have been keyword researched seems as though it would have a major impact on traffic. This is what many people thought the exclusive titles were when they were introduced, but unfortunately this is not the case.

    2) We all want high-quality hubs. Here are 2 suggestions that I think would make hubs more valuable/easier to use for readers:
       a. Full-size images - HP emphasizes the importance of quality images, but makes it impossible to show full-size images. Depending on the dimensions of the image, an image actually shows up smaller in the slideshow than it does on the hub. There have been hubs I've decided not to write because the accompanying images and diagrams wouldn't be seen at a large enough size to be useful. I understand the benefits of the slideshow, but could there possibly be the ability to click on an image while in the slideshow to bring up a full-size image?
       b. Table of contents - this would both help readers find specifically what they are looking for, and also give them a quick preview of what they'll find in the hub.

    3) Alt attributes on images would help with the search engines.

    4) The ability to set the ad level. Hubs are a little ad-heavy these days. I think it affects the user experience. It would be nice if we could select a lower ad setting, as we used to have.

    5) Ability to open links in a new window. This is also a functionality that we used to have. It seems as though keeping our hub open when a user clicks a link would be a good thing.

    6) Ditto on all the previous comments about "discover more hubs".
    Thanks again!

  21. Reality Bytes profile image77
    Reality Bytesposted 10 years ago

    A table of content, as others have suggested.

    Being able to provide links to further information within the hub would be awesome!

    1. Marcy Goodfleisch profile image83
      Marcy Goodfleischposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I agree that we sorely need a way for people to find topics here.  The front page is devoted to attracting writers more so than attracting readers.  Writers (the kind you want to attract) will find the doorway for publishing here - they know to look for small links at the bottom of websites that offer writers' guidelines.  You can put your puff pieces about successful writers there, rather than on page one.

      Readers, however, land of the front page and think it is for members only, or only for writers.  The main page should show the variety of topics, with rotating hubs featured to pull people in.  You could also have a place for 'top picks' by editors or something.  Again, rotate those that are featured.

      Have a feature for "Meet our Writers," and rotate out who gets posted there.  The same people get promoted on the front page, over and over. 

      It's asking too much work of readers for them to have to figure out there's a tiny, hard to see button that says 'Explore' at the top (where NOBODY would naturally look for it), and to also figure out that 'explore' is HubSpeak for the directory of articles.

      1. Reality Bytes profile image77
        Reality Bytesposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        I was thinking of a table of contents within a hub which would lead a reader to specific information in the hub itself.



        what types
        when to plant
        how to water

        Jumping the reader to exactly what they are searching without having to scroll up and down a page.  Sort of how Wikipedia does it on their pages.  My favorite part of Wikipedia, the ability to acquire an answer without spending a bunch of time reading the whole page. Thanks to the "Content" widget.

        Wiki page on Daffodils

      2. Barbara Kay profile image72
        Barbara Kayposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        I've had that happen at other sites too. Squidoo is one of them. The search box is so small that it took me a long time to find it.

        It would be nice for readers to come here and look up things on a regular basis. If we made it easy for them to do so, they might.

      3. Scribenet profile image62
        Scribenetposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        +1 Marcy...I think everything has to be geared to "who" is reading at HubPages...ease of access to information. Relying on Google only for searching, not good. If they don't find what they want they go.

        Once we have them here,( no matter who brings them in), making it easy for them to find "more information and entertainment"...priceless and good for HubPages and all the writers! Navigation,navigation,navigation.

  22. ologsinquito profile image82
    ologsinquitoposted 10 years ago

    Marcy, that's an excellent point. A front page that lets people search easily for topics, and is geared more toward readers, would probably help drive a lot of traffic to our hubs.

  23. DrMark1961 profile image96
    DrMark1961posted 10 years ago

    I have mentioned this issue in the past, and it has already been discussed here, but I would like to bring it up again. I doubt HP is going to change, however.
    I would like to ask the HP staff a question. When browsing the internet looking for an answer to your question, if you fall upon a page that has an ad on top, ads along the side, floating ads that have nothing to do with your subject (even if they claim to), and more ads on the bottom, are you likely to visit that site again or add that site to your list of "time-wasters" when looking for your next answer? I have a feeling I already know the answer.
    I does not matter if your hub answers the question or not, people. You are not going to get more traffic until the page layout changes.
    The only thing I can see that is going to change traffic at all, and improve the reputation of this site, is to take the huge "above the fold" ad off. HP obviously realizes it is a problem, which is why they hide it from HP users.

  24. Paul Edmondson profile imageSTAFF
    Paul Edmondsonposted 10 years ago

    We've done ad layout tests including turning off all the ads on some subdomains and haven't seen it have a positive effect on traffic or engagement.  That said, we are looking into ways of being smarter with the ad layout by considering various elements of the page to determine a more optimal layout.

  25. LCDWriter profile image90
    LCDWriterposted 10 years ago

    This is a long thread so sorry if I'm repeating.

    I would like the ability to be able to put smaller pictures to the left or right.  Sometimes the formatting looks wrong when I have to put everything on one side.  I'd like to be able to do that with all capsules as well (make them smaller and move to the left and not just the right).

  26. LuisEGonzalez profile image79
    LuisEGonzalezposted 10 years ago

    Rank of keywords per author/category or subcategory like maybe; Entertainment/photos and videos/photography for example.
    Table of contents and everything  Marcy Goodfleisch said,
    and make a copied checking tool that actually works.

  27. Michael Willis profile image68
    Michael Willisposted 10 years ago

    #1- Table of contents...and a way to link to the capsule associated with the listed items in table of content.

    #2- Larger images when clicked on. Slideshow is great, but images are smaller in some cases and the images should be seen when I/You click on the one image...not the entire slideshow. Using an image to show a graph or a list works when you only get "that image," not when you get s slideshow.

    #3- Definitely control over the Other Hubs section! We as authors know what may be more related to our Hubs than a machine generated choice.

    #4- More choices  for videos! Also a way for us to upload our own videos without Autoplay!!! I always leave a page when this occurs. I can see this hurting traffic to hubs with this feature.

    #5- A Slideshow Capsule/Photo Gallery...where we can add images to this specific slideshow with a paragraph size descriptions for each image. Image should be full size. This would be different than the HP slideshow.

    #6- An Author "Topic/Group" page where all our hubs in a single group (not like the main page we have) can be listed with a brief description. Since the RSS feed is not on our pages anymore, this may help readers find all of our other Hubs in the same category.

    #7- Do not have seasonal hubs de-indexed!!! (Unless poor quality of course) Even in the off season when traffic is slower. Editing for no other reason than to fit the QAP does not better a hub. When the hub is not indexed, we will lose links as people see the link as invalid! Google also will see the hub as missing and you have to start all over again finding viewers.
    I have stopped writing new hubs this past year and deleting those that have slowed down. Working a full-time job and family and trying to edit constantly hubs does not work for me that well. I know the seasonal hubs will pick back up their traffic when the time comes...if the Hubs are still to be seen and ranked.

    #8- Ability to have a photo capsule side by side for comparisons!

  28. Paul Edmondson profile imageSTAFF
    Paul Edmondsonposted 10 years ago

    I'm looking for more ideas on how to help people make better Hubs.  A piece of data, the top 19% of hubs by quality account for 30% of  traffic.  The remaining 81% account for 70%.

    1. HollieT profile image82
      HollieTposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      HP have produced a massive disincentive for producing great hubs though Paul. I know that this has been raised before, but if I may, can I ask you to walk in the shoes of a hubber?

      I do the keyword research, the ordinary research, I find high quality images, I spend a lot of time finding media which supports my page, I also try to make it interesting, to add value. I assess the competition, attempt to outrank them. Then, I find, that pleasing Goggle is not my greatest problem, nor is my competition, nor is the quality of the page. I end up competing with HP's related adds on my own page, who are now using the keywords that I HAVE researched, to lure visitors from that carefully researched, methodically produced page. And I don't even get a cut! 

      For me, this is a problem. I understand that HP need to increase their revenue, of course they do. However, I'm pretty sure that we can develop ways to do this together. I wouldn't give my competitors my keywords, I wouldn't say here's the work that I've done, now lure them away with my work and cut me out. This is a problem.

      1. janderson99 profile image56
        janderson99posted 10 years agoin reply to this

        I agree.
        Also, despite the stats, I don't agree that high quality (QAP score) will inevitably mean more traffic.
        This started with requests for how to improve "your traffic"
        now the request is for ideas for making "better hubs".
        What everyone wants to know is how to make hubs that generate more traffic and what should HP do, so that we get more traffic from the hubs we have created, and will create in the future.
        Just improving HP defined quality (QAPscores) won't do that IMO.
        QAP is a good CrAP filter, after that it has little value IMO. Especially given it is unreliable for better pages - I think the range quoted was 5.8 - 7.6 for one hub .  I'm done with this, Cheers,

        1. HollieT profile image82
          HollieTposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          For me, the question is "how do I generate more traffic, which in turn will generate more income?" I know that's not the question for everyone who writes here, but for me, important.

          So, it's a bit pointless for me to attempt to generate more traffic, if that traffic only converts to income for  others.

        2. aa lite profile image84
          aa liteposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          I agree.  All this talk about quality is a little bit strange when I my media rich, well researched hubs are outranked by absolute rubbish 20 word Q&A sites.

    2. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Click! - the light bulb went on.  Dim, but it's on for a change. smile

      Presumably, "hubs by quality" means hubs with high QAP scores.  Which, in simple terms, means "stellar" hubs.  Length, pictures, maps, videos and quizzes, short capsules, etc.  You are (again!) promoting stellar hubs and (again!) giving us the reason why.

      You've put up word count, complete with check marks.  You've put up the number of pictures, complete with check marks.  You've done it with "specialty" capsules (map, quiz, etc.).  Can you add the number of text capsules, maybe with an indication of the average words per capsule or something similar?  Maximum words per capsule, perhaps, or a single check box that goes from red to orange to green as maximum words/capsule falls.

      Without reviewing the definition of "stellar" that about covers the mechanics.  All that's left is a neon sign appearing across the screen when the "publish" button is hit on a non-stellar hub.  *NOTICE!  THIS HUB DOES NOT MEET OPTIMAL QUALITY REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE IT NEEDS A VIDEO!!!  ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO PUBLISH THIS POS? (yes/no button).

      But there are more considerations as well - the grammar and spelling and the general layout, or formatting.  Many don't seem to use a spell checker and that would probably be a good thing.  I hesitate on a grammar checker, mostly because the darned things never like how I write!  Which probably indicates it would be a good thing.  smile

      General layout - your new templates are addressing that already.  Given the huge variance in hub topics, styles, types and a hundred other things I don't see you doing much better than that general suggestion.

      And that leaves notification for older hubs that need work and the subject of content.  I do not see HP staff reviewing and commenting on a million existing hubs, or even those currently being produced.  Or even just the older ones that are unfeatured for quality reasons.

      QAP scores can, however.  I know, I know - you've already shot down that request (from more than a few hubbers), but...
      Can you put that score into the edit screen, right under the "need some goals" area?  Include a "confidence value" as well, and if all possible break it into the three sections.  "Confidence" could be the number of ratings it has received - one Turker rating the hub gives a confidence of 1, 10 rating it give a confidence of 10.  I'm sure the numbers are wrong, but you get the idea - some general idea of how much confidence we might put into that score.  Better than a number might simply be "low", "med" and "high".

      Putting it into the edit hub screen means we can't reasonably search for low scoring hubs to take a look at.  OK - I believe you've already stated that the QAP will become a larger part of hub score.  Hub score that is sortable in the stats screen.

      Paul, I know you don't want that information made public, and you've even given a very valid reason, but consider:
      I see a hub with a low score and proceed to the edit screen.  I find a QAP of 6 and a confidence of "high" with a "help" button to a new learning center entry on using the information right next to it.  I see the check boxes above filled and a screen full of squiggly lines and blocked in text.  I need to work on grammar and spelling (and you've provided suggestions, even!) but capsules and formatting are probably OK.

      Or, I edit a low hub score hub.  The QAP is 8, with a confidence of "low".  Filled check boxes, no squiggly lines in the text.  Clicking the "help" button I discover that there is probably nothing wrong with the hub;  low traffic is likely the cause of the poor hub score.  Maybe a poor topic, maybe poor keywords, but it is a stellar hub and the writing itself does not need help.  True, "content" may still be weak but you've got to leave something for us to work on.  And if the QAP is broken into sections that would even give an indication of content.

      The whole point is that this kind of information can be used to get a very good idea of what's wrong with a hub.  Nothing you can do will ever give an absolute answer to why it doesn't get traffic, but such a system can give a very good idea of why a hub isn't a "better" hub.  For me, I just don't think there is anything at all you can do that would be more valuable than sharing those QAP scores; whether they are high confidence or low I can make use of that information.

  29. psycheskinner profile image82
    psycheskinnerposted 10 years ago

    That actually suggest to me that quality is surprisingly uniform.  It is not even close to 80/20.

    1. Paul Edmondson profile imageSTAFF
      Paul Edmondsonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Not for featured stuff now, it was at one point, but we have made a bunch of progress on the backlog etc.  Quality as a whole is going up.

      I would really like to find a scalable way to help people improve their Hubs so that they are all very good.  We compare ourselves to sites like wikihow to see how are quality compares.

      HubPages is #2 behind wikihow.  I really want to catch them:)

      1. janderson99 profile image56
        janderson99posted 10 years agoin reply to this

        We don't know the QAP scores for our Hubs!
        If we knew the total + components we would know what to fix.
        Ultimately the only way to lift average scores, is to raise the threshold to force people to comply. But as you get higher it gets more and more subjective and may be less and less related to traffic. Good enough with traffic is Good enough, surely. There is a huge amount of time involved to lift quality from very good to excellent for little proven gain for the hubber IMO. Enough.

        1. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          The only real objection I would have to this is that good enough for traffic WAS good enough.  Before Panda hit.

          Point is, google is going to keep raising the bar and as a result "good enough for traffic today" is not going to be good enough for traffic tomorrow.  Somewhere it will end, but that's going to be at the high end of the QAP scores (if not higher), not just "good enough" for now.

          1. janderson99 profile image56
            janderson99posted 10 years agoin reply to this

            Just look at the "quality" of the first 10 pages in any SERP listing, including "hubpages + title e.g."curry recipe hubpages".  Score them 1 to 10 and see whether quality correlates with SERP position. It is a very revealing exercise in defining what Google wants????
            The cream don't rise to the top!
            The proof is in the pudding!
            No video in the top 10 for curry recipes
            Where have all the Stella's gone?
            bye for now!

            1. janderson99 profile image56
              janderson99posted 10 years agoin reply to this

              The better way to do these searches is
     curry recipe
     buying a car online

      2. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        Don't know if you can understand just how good that is to hear, but it is welcome news indeed.  And backed up by figures, yet - that the ratio is going down is a good indication the general quality is rising.

  30. jimmythejock profile image82
    jimmythejockposted 10 years ago

    Maybe seperate subdomains for groups of hubs for example For my ww1 hubs I would love to see if they would fare even better than they do now if they had a seperate sub domain.....jimmy
    I do realise that is a big ask lol

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      You can open another account.  It won't have the same name, but you can make that clear in the profile as well as to google via authorship.

    2. Paul Edmondson profile imageSTAFF
      Paul Edmondsonposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      We've tested moving hubs to another subdomain.  At one point I moved all my barbecue Hubs to a bbqpaul acct.  They pretty much performed the same.  Not sure a new subdomain will help you much...

  31. FlourishAnyway profile image96
    FlourishAnywayposted 10 years ago

    Perhaps as a "reward" for top quality hubs, HubPages can do a daily Twitter feed of the "best of the best" in a given content area(s).  Asking all of us to individually push our content to various venues is not overly efficient, but it is crucial now.  A HubPages Twitter feed would be a powerful add-on and an incentive to constantly improve quality.

    I'm not a fan of the grammar, spell checking, and suggesting edits ideas.  It's just good writing.  We can already spell check and people don't always do it.  Nothing replaces the contextual human element.  If people really need help with grammar and suggested edits, it is already available elsewhere in other programs that are free. If anything, maybe add the spell check functionality to the title and summary boxes?     

    We need ongoing education about what makes a good topic and why -- i.e., what is it about those 19% of hubs by quality specifically that accounts for the 30% of the traffic?  Hold a few out as examples if the authors are willing. 

    Meaningful analyses on top performers and their traffic sources so that we can distill lessons learned. (Do they have multiple blogs, how many hubs on average, etc.)

    The Apprentice Program needs more attention and energy.  I understand it is on hiatus, but it would be helpful to know the status and results of any analysis conducted.  Perhaps there are lessons to learn for all of us.

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I'd be pretty PO'd if HP were to make it known that MY hub got great traffic.  I've already got 100 DMCA's to file.

      I highly doubt that HP or anyone else can point to specifics that give rise to traffic.  It's a conglomerate of many things; were it a single thing (or even a small number of characteristics) google's algorithm would be massively gamed to the point of totally worthless.

  32. Benjimester profile image89
    Benjimesterposted 10 years ago

    Hey guys,

    I'm finally getting back to writing some more Hubs after many months away.  Just wanted to say how impressed I am with all the new features, options, and helps you guys have added to the site since last I was here.  It's really great how you guys are always keeping Hubpages on the cutting edge.  Really looking forward to exploring all the new options.


  33. peachpurple profile image80
    peachpurpleposted 10 years ago

    i love all the ideas given by hubbers. When will the suggestions implement?

  34. Fiction Teller profile image60
    Fiction Tellerposted 10 years ago

    A couple of questions for Paul:

    1) What do the less-than-stellar hubs look like?  Most of them, I mean?  What traits do they share?   I realized I'd been assuming that I knew, but what do the numbers say?  As in, what categories do they tend to be in, what does a typical title look like, what's the nature of the content, how bad are they in terms of English errors (are they barely comprehensible, badly proofed, or whatever), what are the most common problems, etc. Help us recognize them in our own accounts.

    2) What do you want from your users, ultimately?  Do you A) want people to know how to produce good hubs?  Or do you B) want to automate and scale the process of creating/correcting/fixing their hubs for them while they keep producing pretty much the same quality content? 

    If A), one approach is to put more resources into training.  If you truly want to teach people to make good content, and you're confident you have the key to quality (rewarded-by-traffic) content, then you could stand behind that confidence and create a formalized mini university here.  Create extensive online tutorials for exactly how to create the perfect hub, ideally not just one sort, but in various categories.  (The perfect recipe hub.  The perfect funny hub.  The perfect photo hub.  The perfect whatever hub.)  Link to a grammar authority.  Host a dictionary.  Organize a formal coaching/critiquing exchange system.  Teach people to make their own videos.  Point them to free photo editing resources.  Etc., etc.  An army of awesome content creators could make this site something different altogether. 

    Also teach them about search algorithms and traffic sources.  Teach them that a hub that lacks user engagement makes their whole subdomain vulnerable.  Help them understand when HubPages is doing things "for their own good" and let them decide whether they trust HP to do that.  Otherwise, they clamor "it's not fair" and nothing makes sense to them.

    Alternatively, if training is too difficult, put more resources into rewarding.  Recruit quality content creators the old-fashioned way, with money.

    If B), because A) is too expensive or risky due to changing standards of quality or fears of users abusing the system (learn and run), then simply make quality filters more stringent and make the tools laughably easy to use - so easy that content creators don't have to invest too much time in something they don't have much control over, anyway.  You've been asking "But what tools?  Which ones do you want?"  Basically, all of them.  Any you can think of.  Have ten newbies create ten stellar hubs while noting each time something is not easy for them and they'd like help.  ("And then I had to go search for a thesaurus...)"

    Right now it seems you are striving for both A) and B), and each half-tushedly, so to speak, so they often come into conflict.  Empowering writers through giving tips, but little else (no money, no insight into the stats or scores, no committed training), while automating so that the mildly empowered writers feel helpless and sometimes offended by what seems to be arbitrary processes.

  35. Fiction Teller profile image60
    Fiction Tellerposted 10 years ago

    I also echo the sentiments of others who want more control of the elements on the pages in their subdomains.  One thing I see over and over is HubPages saying "We want quality" and users saying "We gave you quality but we're not getting traffic" and HubPages saying, "Quality is rewarded, I tell you," and users saying "Thanks a lot for the insult!"  Users don't think of quality on a statistical scale, as HubPages does; they think of it on a per-case basis, and on that basis, some quality hubs as scored by the QAP will never get good traffic with a hub optimized in standard format.  Give us more control of our subdomains' look, feel, and inclusions so we can optimize for our personal niche.

  36. Marcy Goodfleisch profile image83
    Marcy Goodfleischposted 10 years ago

    +1000 on the great suggestions by Writer Fox. 

    Also, you've added the great 'progress' tracker that helps writers know when they've got a good number of words, etc., but it's a bit difficult to spot, and not completely explained.  Put yourself if the position of a first-time user who's never written a hub, and find ways to instantly draw attention to it and inform them what the tool is about.  Most new Hubbers do not check out the learning center before they start writing (for one thing, it's difficult to find now). They immediately start publishing hubs.

    You can also raise awareness about the Learning Center by promoting it on the hub editing page and making it possible to toggle back and forth while in the edit mode (probably not easy to do, but what the heck, I'll throw out the idea).  At least point people to it while they're editing.  Maybe have a button that says, "Save edits and go to the Learning Center."

  37. Paul Edmondson profile imageSTAFF
    Paul Edmondsonposted 10 years ago

    Thanks everyone. I've read this entire thread at least four times now and added many things to our plans.  One thing I've learned is how hard it is to write well.  It's one of the toughest things people do.  A true skill. 

    At the beginning, I outlined some services that were meant to address the most common issues we find in Hubs, but none of them address the depth issue.  That's the real difference maker.

    1. Will Apse profile image88
      Will Apseposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I wouldn't undervalue the benefits of getting the simple things right. But writing skills matter more than any other single thing.

      And include:

      Good research skills
      Picking out what is important from a mass of facts
      Constructing a lucid structure
      Writing in a way that readers will enjoy
      Producing an aesthetically pleasing page

      I think HP have made big efforts to point people in the right direction and just need to keep hammering away at the same old message. Learn to write. Learn to find fresh topics/keywords.

      1. aa lite profile image84
        aa liteposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        Unfortunately there is nothing HP can do to help us with these points, except perhaps the last one (and their advice that we source only images that we can legally use, although absolutely correct, doesn't  help.  Much easier and quicker to produce a pleasing page, if you just find lovely pictures and use them whether they are copyrighted or not).

        Except they could possibly help with finding fresh topics/keywords if the 'exclusive titles' weren't such an abject failure.

        1. Will Apse profile image88
          Will Apseposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          What we need are more HP sprites holding more little hands, lol.

          1. psycheskinner profile image82
            psycheskinnerposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            The 'exclusive titles' were more like bog pixies that lead people into the digital quicksand.  One might have assumed they were chosen automatically based one some kind of SEO algorithm.  But at this point I have no idea where they came from and have deleted every hub I started based on one.

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 10 years agoin reply to this

              Really?  I still have 7 of them - between all 7 I get about 5 views per day.  sad

              I THINK they were chose based on saturation of the topic and little more.  Certainly there was no SEO done - no effort to provide decent keywords or title.

            2. Will Apse profile image88
              Will Apseposted 10 years agoin reply to this

              I'm assuming you checked each keyword phrase thoroughly? I mean by that you looked at the front page of the SERPs for that phrase and decided you could beat out the competition there?

              I'm also assuming your sub is not panda-stricken. If it is, getting away from that has to be the first priority. Only the very best, well aged pages will rank at all.

              Any list that you see anywhere can only be a starting point.

            3. aa lite profile image84
              aa liteposted 10 years agoin reply to this

              Google is being kind to my exclusives today.  Collectively I've had 10 views on 9 exclusives.  I think I deleted 1 as well.

              I think they were 'made' by looking at a list from a google suggestion scraper.  Then were curated by somebody (probably Christy) to find titles that haven't been used on HP already.  Although that doesn't mean there are no titles that are very close to them on HP. 

              There was no search volume or competition research done on them.

    2. Fiction Teller profile image60
      Fiction Tellerposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      If you want more help with depth, I really think you need more templates based on the kinds of articles that are published here.  Don't you already have one for recipes?  It's kind of cursory, but could be made more detailed.  There are plenty of authors who could help you construct a basic template for each popular type of content.  The idea is to create more targeted guided templates. 


      What kind of hub is this? 
      A) How-to
      B) Informational
      C) Recipe
      D) News
      E) Just for Fun
      F) etc.

      User clicks "How-to."  Gets taken to guided instructions like:

      Type your title here.  How to...

      What will the reader learn how to do in this hub?  Write one paragraph here.

      How difficult is this?  Check one.

      Why is this worth trying?  Write at least one sentence here describing why someone would want to do this.

      Indicate one problem many people have.

      Post a photo of the finished product here.

      List all the things you need to have before you start in this capsule, explaining each item that the reader may not be familiar with and how to get it.

      etc., etc.

      1. Lisa HW profile image62
        Lisa HWposted 10 years agoin reply to this


        1. Fiction Teller profile image60
          Fiction Tellerposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          Wonderful ideas!  I agree, especially with your point that various kinds of authority are perfectly fine and dandy, as long as they're consistently and clearly disclosed for what they are.  That's in line with what I was saying about matching user intent to article format.  Sometimes readers are looking for what you call personal insight; sometimes they're seeking a condensation of research (and I think your references box idea is a great one); sometimes they want a recipe to print; sometimes they want a discussion.

          As HubPages is zeroing in on quality, it's also constraining it to a certain degree by making all types of articles conform to one standard.  More tools that  help keep the site rich with variety even as it adds depth will help.

      2. Mark Ewbie profile image80
        Mark Ewbieposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        Yeah.  I can't wait to try producing anything remotely creative  or different using a template.

        What Google wants is less generic content - a trillion pages of how to do the same thing or cook the same meal.  It wants unique - a different angle.

        I understand the template for some content and some 'authors'.  I do not believe anyone with a shred of imagination wants a template.

        Sorry to be abrupt.  I got QAPped recently for something that was perfect for the internet - the sort of short immediate attractive content that gets noticed.  It was too short, too whatever for the new rules.

        Now I can write acres of dirge and add loads of graphics but... it doesn't make the piece any better.  Look at the top ranked stuff, the stuff that gets shared, noticed.  It is NOT a thousand words long.

        So yeah.  Templates, QAP - whatever.

        1. Fiction Teller profile image60
          Fiction Tellerposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          Mark, I hear you.  I'm suggesting this kind of tool for people who need the help creating an article with depth - I'd assume it would be optional.  Even if you'd choose to use it, it does not exclude creative variations.  It would be a guideline.

          Google likes ehow - still.  Why?  One reason is its consistent format.  You will always get certain elements (a certain depth) even in the very short pieces - like a supplies list, steps, introduction.  So even if the how-to is practically useless, you will still get a list of references at the bottom, which is worth something to people who are having a hard time finding good sources in...wait for it...Google!

          So why is eHow so consistent, even though they were at one point partially a UGC site?  I have my suspicions.  Much of the content that's survived in the search engines appears to be that written by (or edited by) paid writers.  Many of us who were paid writers for eHow (Demand Media) know that the articles were broken down into certain elements, and they had to be included, each time.

          Google likes uniqueness; it also likes reliability.  Since Panda, it's been redoubling its efforts to master handling user metrics - not very well, but trying.  It thinks users want trustworthiness and a whole bunch of other stuff.  It says, "Give users what they want."  Then it tries to figure out what that is.

          Have you noticed that many of the interesting mom-and-pop pages have disappeared off the SERPs in the last couple of years?  That's because Google can't yet tell the difference between uniqueness and inferiority and prefers to err on the side of big brands.  They're rewarding uniqueness and consistency with unique inconsistency, confusing webmasters.

          So what this means is that HubPages, which wants reliable, evergreen traffic (that's bread and butter) would gain from making its content look as consistent as possible.  In my view.

          1. Mark Ewbie profile image80
            Mark Ewbieposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            Yes, I hear you too.  I have finally realised that what I like to produce does not fit well within HP - it is not how to or information.  Those few pages like that I have done on here do OK - so there is a lesson for me.  And common formats for those make some sense.

            For my other stuff, where I like to have fun I am back to playing with a site instead.  Before I joined HP I was unsuccessfully messing around with sites - now thanks to HP and the contributors I have learned quite a lot.

            I am hoping to turn the occasional visitor into someone who reads more than one page.  That means less advertising, no links to other people - trying to build something that is attractive and engaging.  It is a relief not to have to write 750 words on every page - I think it won't matter.

            1. Fiction Teller profile image60
              Fiction Tellerposted 10 years agoin reply to this

              Yeah, when I first arrived at HubPages, I had high hopes - high hopes, which fled quickly - that it would provide a model for marketing fiction. The Internet still lacks such a model - ebooks are still not quite up to their full potential (too clubbish, not low-cost enough).  It's only a matter of time before indie stuff is rewarded, but I'm impatient.

              I have a family to feed with my earnings, so...creative writing goes on the backburner as long as problem-solving writing (as I call it) brings in better income.

              I think when you direct your writing to a joke larger society (not just the SEO community) can share, you'll do amazing.

              1. Mark Ewbie profile image80
                Mark Ewbieposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                Thanks FT.  Its taken / taking a while to sort things out but I still have some hope!  I have no problem with HP - its a great place to start writing and learning and the community is the best I have come across.

            2. Marcy Goodfleisch profile image83
              Marcy Goodfleischposted 10 years agoin reply to this

              Mark, I still think you should be doing something very commercial with your Stick Man theme.  It's perfect for branding an entire set of books, magnets, greeting cards, etc.  I can picture it getting syndicated, if you could do panel cartoons (either one frame, or four).  I know the odds of breaking in are huge, but it can happen. 

              I love Stick Man!

              1. Mark Ewbie profile image80
                Mark Ewbieposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                Thanks Marcy. I am putting together a stickman site and will see how it works.  Keywords, content, engagement and marketing.  I am very grateful for all the positive feedback - much appreciated!

                1. earner profile image81
                  earnerposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                  We're watching that space


        2. Fiction Teller profile image60
          Fiction Tellerposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          Was it truly length?  Are they ever more specific?  I've had one creative (opinion piece) marked for quality and got no email notice or reasons.  The only thing I could figure out was my use of the "it sucks" slang.  I could see a rater deeming "it sucks" was a "significant deviation from standard usage," especially if he or she never personally got value from reading "it sucks" articles.  It sucks, but there you go.

          Anyway, if it was in your regular Mark Ewbie account...please take this with a grain of salt, but to me, your hubs are in a no-man's-land category.  They are entertainment and as such will receive more variable (as in, inconsistent) ratings. 

          The QAP standards for creative writing are aimed at elements not easy to capture (either by authors or creators) in creative works.  Though it's not evaluation of inherent value (your work is clearly funny), but of webworthiness value, subjectivity will still weigh even more subjectively, if that makes any sense.  Essentially, you're writing riskier content, satire, with inherently more potential for its crashing when under the microscope.

          It's a familiar scenario, as in my fiction writing, I do similar. smile

  38. Sue Adams profile image95
    Sue Adamsposted 10 years ago


    The greatest service you can provide is to listen to us. We've said it at length before and we are saying it again, so please listen:

    Get rid of the deceptive so called "related searches ads". They appear on our domains without our consent. They have turned HP into a cheap link farm, causing traffic to plunge and  excessively high bounce rates. Plus, they are a  break of the revenue sharing agreement by HP keeping all income arising from them.

  39. Marcy Goodfleisch profile image83
    Marcy Goodfleischposted 10 years ago

    Paul - while we are tossing out ideas, can you guys flip a switch that will allow us to edit the titles of the Exclusives hubs?  I have about 20-25, and some are just not working.  They're also so buried in the search engines that they don't show up in the Title Tuner.

    Thanks for any help you can offer, or other ideas on what we should do with them.

  40. janderson99 profile image56
    janderson99posted 10 years ago

    One more Suggestion

    Why doesn't HP add some simple advice to the reject email they send out for pages that failed QAP with the scores. Something like one of these three options:

    1 #### Average: 5.8 ----Substance: 4.2 Organization:7.1 Grammar and Mechanics: 6.1

    2 ####  Average: Fail----Substance: Fail Organization:Very Good Grammar and Mechanics: Good

    3 #### Hub failed QAP because the Substances is below standard (see this) and the Grammar and Mechanics is OK, but could be improved (see this).
    ['see this' = links to advice]

    This would be a lot more helpful than simply getting a reject notice, refering to that gal called 'Stella' and seeing bullet holes in the "Feature" List .

    This would be really easily to implement, would be ultra helpful and would educate authors about what HP wants.
    It is done one to one with the author and does not mean that the scores are published (which HP refuses to do!). The no-feed-back rule could still apply.
    The outcome in getting a hub featured, has taught the hubber something which they can aim to do better next time. - less rejects

  41. Paul Edmondson profile imageSTAFF
    Paul Edmondsonposted 10 years ago

    We will keep working on it...we try and show people everyday what a good Hub is with Hub of the day, the progress bar is another indicator.  The QAP still needs refinement to give authors detailed suggestions but we are working on it as well as some hubtool improvements to give people suggestions.

    Do: Make in-depth media rich hubs
    Don't: Stuff links or products

    I don't think I've seen a Hub that filled out the progress bar, that follows the do's and dont's not pass.

    1. janderson99 profile image56
      janderson99posted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I know from my own experience that having a hub published in 2011, de-indexed for quality is a very frustrating experience.
      What could be wrong?
      Where do you start?
      What does HP want me to change?
      Mostly you make guesses. I'll break the text into more capsules - maybe that will help. I'll check the spelling and grammar. etc. etc. For some  hubs you get another reject notice, despite making lots of changes. The point is that you haven't made the right guess!!!
      It would be extremely useful if HP could tell the hubber which of the three areas has caused the failure.
      The Stucture needs Improving
      Check your Spelling and Grammar.
      This provides specific feed back to the author that is not achieved with the progress bar (count of elements) or by looking at HOTD.
      Anyway that's my suggestion. I tried.

      In one case, after two rejects and making major edits, I finally hit on what was causing one hub to be rejected. I had inserted three copyright notices throughout the body of the text. When that was changed it passed. All the other changes I made were irrelevant and probably did not improve the quality. This wastes time and effort.

    2. HollieT profile image82
      HollieTposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      We will keep working on it...we try and show people everyday what a good Hub is with Hub of the day, the progress bar is another indicator.

      This is what I struggle with, I've seen some great HoTD, and some really lousy ones (although, I've never been into ripping apart hubbers who've been awarded this accolade, I think that stinks)

      Google clearly rate some really rubbish content as quality, just look at some of the Yahoo answers etc. They occupy the #1 spot, and they're factually inaccurate and grammatically incorrect.

      There doesn't seem to be any equilibrium when it comes to what HP rate as quality. HoTD, a couple of days ago was excellent, IMHO, about Japanese society etc. etc. But some are dreadful to the point of embarrassing, and they have been awarded HoTD over and above some excellent content.   With such a disparity, how is the mere hubber to access what is, and is not, worthy?

      1. Writer Fox profile image34
        Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        How does HP choose the HoTD?  There are so many, many on this website that nobody could read them all and pick just one.

        1. aa lite profile image84
          aa liteposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          Well now they apparently have the QAP data.  So how about they just say that 8 or above only get considered.

          Admittedly as Paul pointed, the QAP data is inaccurate. Still I think it would narrow down the field (or even use a QAP 9 only, that would narrow it further), and then whoever chooses the HoTD would check to make sure they agree with the rating.

          If it is impossible to really use HoTD to highlight the excellent content here, then it should be scrapped.

        2. HollieT profile image82
          HollieTposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          I don't know how they choose them, but maybe this is something they could look at? At least, by using criteria other than who is popular, there would be some uniformity. That's not a bad thing.

  42. profile image0
    Beth37posted 10 years ago

    What about videos that explain the functions of specific tools and how they work.

    Video one: Key words
    Video two: What Panda, Penguin etc... are and why they matter to us.

    This kind of thing. It wouldn't take terribly long. They don't have to be professional, just relaxed and informative. Anyhoo... that's something I would enjoy.

    1. susi10 profile image96
      susi10posted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Yes, I agree with you. Videos about keywords etc would help a lot of Hubbers with SEO! smile

      1. profile image0
        Beth37posted 10 years agoin reply to this

        A video about what SEO means... lol

        1. Writer Fox profile image34
          Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          I wrote an SEO Tutorial Hub that explains what SEO is and has lots of videos from Google.

          1. susi10 profile image96
            susi10posted 10 years agoin reply to this

            Cool! I will check it out. smile

        2. susi10 profile image96
          susi10posted 10 years agoin reply to this

          Well, SEO is very important to get high daily views. Many Hubbers write hubs without making them search-engine friendly. If your hubs aren't going to be found on search engines, you will get low daily views. Whilst you still may be found through Pinterest and other sites, search engines are the main ones.

          1. profile image0
            Beth37posted 10 years agoin reply to this

            I see, ok thanks. Search Engine... optimizing or some such thing I would imagine.

            1. susi10 profile image96
              susi10posted 10 years agoin reply to this

              Yes, SEO and keyword research are essential to any Hubbers success. That was a very good idea about the videos, Beth. I hope HubPages do make some videos about this! smile

              1. profile image0
                Beth37posted 10 years agoin reply to this

                Yea! Beth is smart!

  43. Fiction Teller profile image60
    Fiction Tellerposted 10 years ago

    I just read on the blog post … -all-hubs/ that the QAP never actually "passes" a hub for the quality assessment. 

    "Most Hubbers think their Hubs have either been through the QAP or not, and that some Hubs have either “passed” or “failed.” But this isn’t really an accurate way to look at the process. Rather, we constantly collect data and improve our algorithms to feature deserving content."

    I hadn't realized that.  I'd thought they were doing a sweep of all older hubs and some would come through the quality assessment process and some wouldn't - and the ones that came through would be deemed a-okay with HubPages' current standards. 

    On the contrary -  now it seems there is no way for us to know if hubs are in the clear and "done good" or are not up to par and just haven't been gotten to yet.

    This does not empower me.  At no point will I be able to say, "Got it!  Now I know how to write a great hub.  Okay, let's do it."

    Rather, it makes me say, "I think I got it.  But I'm not certain.  I have plenty of hubs Google likes that don't seem to meet the QAP criteria for an 8 because of their subject matter alone.  I've been waiting to see how they look in HubPages' interpretation.  Now HubPages refuses to tell me what it thinks of my content, leaving me wondering whether it's been assessed at all.  So why invest the time creating anything else?  It's took risky now.  I'll just write another e-book to sell on Kindle."

    HubPages, please empower us.  Of course you reserve the right to remove any content at any time.  That doesn't mean you have to leave us hanging regarding the current status of our hubs.  Otherwise, we'll still be blindly making the same mistakes, or do as many others have done and give up.

    1. janderson99 profile image56
      janderson99posted 10 years agoin reply to this

      My interpretation of this

      "Most Hubbers think their Hubs have either been through the QAP or not, and that some Hubs have either “passed” or “failed.” But this isn’t really an accurate way to look at the process. Rather, we constantly collect data and improve our algorithms to feature deserving content."

      The QAP scoring system is in a state of flux and can be changed in the future. That is, the pass mark may be shifted up or down, the weightings applied to the three criteria may change, and HP may apply other factors such as 'reputation' or hubber score to modify the scores. Also HP does not use QAP solely as a CrAP filter, it uses the score for other purpose such as the position on the topics pages.
      That's my guess otherwise the process is too woolly to ever hope to understand. The scores are secret anyway!

  44. Fiction Teller profile image60
    Fiction Tellerposted 10 years ago

    janderson99, I think you're right, but at some point, HubPages needs to commit, even it's to saying "Right now you're okay, you've passed - that may change as we learn more."  Their position now reads more like a legal position, protecting themselves ("Hey, we can't tell you your hubs are okay for now - we might change our minds, and so might Google - so we're just gonna give you some hints and tell you when we do hit something we know we don't like").

    I don't think they realize how that disinclines writers to write here.  If they do realize it, well, all right, but at a certain point they need to say, "We don't actually want you to try to figure things out - you can't! Don't worry about quality per se.  Here are your specific writer guidelines.  Write that and let us do the thinking.  You do the content creating.  We'll either remove the work instantly so you can market it elsewhere without its getting plastered all over the Internet or reward you highly for your investment."

  45. profile image0
    Beth37posted 10 years ago

    Im sorry, I hit my head really hard and I am a little more "off" than I should be. lol

  46. Will Apse profile image88
    Will Apseposted 10 years ago

    People do seem to be falling out a lot more since Simone left. She was a deft fire fighter.

    Still, it is fun seeing the SEO 'experts' worry about hubscores.

  47. ologsinquito profile image82
    ologsinquitoposted 10 years ago

    Forgive me if someone has already mentioned this, but I just thought of one thing that might drive a little traffic. Perhaps you could make the forums more visible and easy to access to outsiders. Visitors might read some of the posts, and then decide to read some hubs. Thanks.

  48. Barbara Kay profile image72
    Barbara Kayposted 10 years ago

    Quality check the question and answers section. I've seen such poorly written questions that it is unbelievable.

  49. BigBlue54 profile image59
    BigBlue54posted 10 years ago

    A good spellchecker would be great but please not just a US based one. Whereas I like a bit of color in my life I find the more colour the better. smile

    I respect the fact that Americans spell some words differently to their UK spelling. All I ask is the same respect in return.

  50. dwelburn profile image91
    dwelburnposted 10 years ago

    Images are my big problem. I spend hours and hours and - well you get the idea, searching for decent pictures I can use on my hubs. If you were able to provide some that would be amazing.

    Suggestions for edits might be useful too.

    1. Writer Fox profile image34
      Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I rarely use flickr for an image. There are tens of thousands of photos per search terms and most are very low quality.  It can take you forever to find something there.  Rather than spending hours looking for something free, you can find high quality photos for under $1 on sites such as: istockphoto, dreamstime, depositphotos, etc.

      1. dwelburn profile image91
        dwelburnposted 10 years agoin reply to this

        I agree; most Flickr photos are very low quality. Maybe it would be worth paying for them. But even at $1 each it will take some time to recoup your investment for them on here unless you have really good traffic, which I don't have yet. Still I'll consider this though. Thanks Writer Fox.

        1. Writer Fox profile image34
          Writer Foxposted 10 years agoin reply to this

          There are many other free photo sites too, such as:
 – this one requires an attribution, but not a link
 – no attribution needed
 – no attribution needed


This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at:

Show Details
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis 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 ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis 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 LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the or domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis 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 YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis 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 LoginYou 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)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe 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 PixelsWe 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.
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore 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 PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)