Recently Paul E http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/132583#post2758981 stated that he has considered:
"splitting HubPages into one version that is high service and another that is very lightly moderated"
but for NOW the focus is on
One HubPages for people that put the reader first
HP appears to be preparing the ground for this option, which could see Hubpro pages shifted to a new site (Elite pages). The potential benefits of this, I guess, is that the cream would be unencumbered by being 'tainted' by the remaining pages (dross). This would have profound implications for Hubpages and its subdomain authors. HP could perhaps cherry pick articles on the original site, and offer to divert them to the Hubpro site after being re-edited by the Hubpro team. Consideration for entry to the new site would depend on traffic success (cream of the crop). Editors Choice already diverts pages from subdomains to the 'mother' URL.
Will this happen in the future? The major emphasis and resources that HP is committing into Hubpro would appear to leave open this option. I guess it depends on whether overall traffic for the entire site can be boosted by improving quality via HubPro, QAP applied to legacy pages, spell check and other site wide actions to improve average 'quality'. One aim of Hubpro was to get a reprieve from Panda. If this does not happen the split would appear to be on the cards.
What do you think about this? I will be leaving HP if this split happens.
I'm not sure why you would leave if a split like that would happen - I would love to see that happen. Why would you care if 'just creative' stuff like poetry doesn't get big hits. It doesn't now unless you promote it via social site - does it?
The reason why *I* would LOVE to see this change; is because the best-written articles on any given subject SHOULD be the most accessible. There are different qualities of articles within HP - and having them all meshed together makes us all look bad when so many people really don't care about their own writing (or how it comes across), at all.
The 'creative' folks who have it in their heads that literary/grammatical criticism of a creative expression is an offense and a sin - can have their own 'level' of HPness; while the (much) better articles are properly showcased and accessible.
I guess I just don't see how it would be an insult. I would expect the majority of my articles to fall within the lesser website. The ones that 'might' be good enough for the 'better-writing' site, I would simply be extra-proud of.
Where each one falls would be my own fault.
The question is this: will there be enough top level articles to support a higher end version of HP. So many good writers have already left!
Some here have terrific views, others who write well often never approach those levels and would probably be grouped much lower.
Furthermore, if the team does not get rid of some of the spam they just added to all of our articles, it won't matter because the entire site will crumble.
Literally all of this could have been avoided simply by removing low level articles, removing spam and creating a very strong QAP. It was a mistake to let just anybody come here to write because the site is now heavily burdened with dross that the team cannot seem to eliminate.
It's no easy job, for sure, and it may have gone too far, which is why Paul may be looking at other options. Cherry picking the best articles will ruin niches for people who have them and cause others to lose the cohesiveness of their work.
Who knows? All I know is that I wish the team would stop all of the digging around, settle on one business plan, let us know what it is and then just go with it. All of this upheaval is tiring me out!
Well, I certainly agree with that, TT2. It has been a long and very frustrating "upheaval" for sure.
Good point about the spam. I am getting the same ads over and over on my articles and it just looks sloppy and annoying.
I'm not talking about the ads, I'm talking about the repeats I see of my own articles under the varying categories. On one hub alone the same article is highlighted 4 different times. Looks horrible and definitely will take a hit from Google.
Yes, I do believe the split will happen. I sensed some time ago that a drastic change was in the works and that becomes more obvious to me every day. I will leave HP, too, if that happens.
Are you saying that top-traffic-gaining articles would be migrated to the new site, or the entire author's pages/profile, etc?
If the former, it would be confusing for authors; if the latter, I don't know how many would make that cut; I know I sure wouldn't. My traffic pretty much sucks.
I have been giving this subject a lot of thought. I do not see any benefit for HP to split and run two sites.
I think they just may move the best to a more professional site and sell the old one (this one). It is obvious to everyone, I believe, that HP is unable to clean up this site, so why would they bother to maintain it if they have the best hubbers/hubs on another site?
Just my humble opinion.
I don't see why HP needs another site.Just have a section that requires special permission to enter. There are several forums that have this. Most dating sites use this method.
I don't know but I expect Paul is considering all options.
He asked me if I would like to be selected for a new HubCrap site. I was flattered by this but was not sure my stuff was crap enough.
My best mate Dave said it definitely was which is quite a compliment.
Mark, your figures are more than sticky enough for a new Hubbish website...
If my take-home ends up improving, I'd stay. If not, I couldn't. I like eating. This is my living.
And where will all the creatives go then?? Poetry is a nonstarter!
Move the top to their own uppity site? Hope to shout! It is getting harder and harder for us regular folk to get hubs accepted.
Doug, I just admitted you to TWD. C'mon over!! :-D
What is TWD?
An off-topic post.
Audrey Howitt and Phyllis Doyle, It's a Facebook group, The Writer's Door, for encouraging and supporting fellow writers. We are over 260 members at the moment. C'mon over!
There is another twist to this which could affect the overall quality of the site. If your hubs that get the most traffic are to be extensively re-written by a Hubpro Editor there would seem to be little point is spending hours and hours building a stellar hub using your own style. The Hubpro decision is based on traffic NOT quality. It is probably easier for a Hubpro editor to do their stuff with a moderate quality, not fully developed hub. So the best strategy may be to write a series of good quality (not excellent), not fully developed hubs, in the same time it would take to write a stellar hub, with all the bells and whistles. It is so hard to predict which topics will be successful. So do more, but of lower quality, knowing that Hubpro will beef up the ones that get traffic. If people adopt this approach the overall quality of hubs on the site may fall.
Another point is that is the 'cream' is shifted out of your subdomain, including the Hubpro edited ones, the reputation of your subdomain will declining leading to risks of declining traffic for your sub. Though your cream may do better on the other site.
I prefer my cream in my coffee where I can stir it up if need be.
I feel that such a split would be the death of those left behind on the old site - which would more than likely be given a derogatory name and develop a bad reputation of "ne'er do well writers". It would become something like Bubblews and follow the same downward path.
I do not want editors touching my writing - so my only choice would be to leave HP entirely and start my own site.
I so agree with TT2 that if HP had not accepted just anyone who signed up as a writer then none of this upheaval would be necessary.
I suggested many times (and I am sure others have) that if there was a period (2 - 3 months) of training with qualified editors in the beginning with a new member who would have to pass quizzes to graduate or given a "thank you for applying but you did not measure up to HP standards" (well, a little kinder than that) email. Suggestion ignored.
Thumbs up to that Phyllis Doyle!
Folks, there are those of us in the middle IMHO. HP was a site where anyone could write now it's going to be taken away? I'm not saying horrible writing should be here, but there are people to help, comments to be made, etc. that is how we learn. I think I've grown since I've been here thanks to all that, but I don't think I'm the cream of the crop!
What happened to the sense of community that made HP so great? Is it all about the almighty dollar? I understand money keeps things going, but is that all that matters?
There are scary days ahead to be sure.
Sadly, the almighty dollar is the only thing that seems to matter anymore--across the board in all industries and businesses....
Gone are the days of sharing and caring and basic human compassion, for those don't pay the bills or contribute to the vastly over-inflated salaries of their CEOs. After all, if we don't kick people to the curb in favor of the shining dollar, how can they make 475 times what their workers do??
Of course the money is important! What do you expect, that the owners of HubPages should run the site purely to benefit complete strangers who want to write? It's a business and businesses exist to make a profit.
Yes, every company should look after their employees and customers, but not if it means sending the business broke! When times are tough, hard decisions have to be made. Cuts have to be made, employees have to go, the business may have to reinvent itself. That's where HP is now.
I can recall, just before Panda hit in 2011, HubPages proudly announcing that it had broken even for the first time. Then Panda hit, and traffic and income died and things have never got back to where they were then - so you can draw your own conclusions about how well the company is doing.
The times, they are a changin', Mary. That's for sure.
Then, why not donate some back? I have not made a dime yet. I must be one of those drosses.
Change isn't scary. It's the fear of change which makes some people scared.
One of my mantras at work used to be "Change is NORMAL". It's staying the same which is really odd.
Regarding change as the norm - not the exception - makes coping with and adapting to change so much easier.
Plus once you know you actually survived the first major change you experience it becomes so much easier to believe you will also cope and survive yet more change.
Also surviving change provides a major incentive to take charge of your own destiny and to manage the risk of one change knocking you off kilter.
That's why a huge number of people from Squidoo have gone on to create their own sites and to diversify where they write. I don't know anybody now who has "all their eggs in one basket".
I can't remember which forum I posted it on, but quite a while ago I suggested HP start a similar site that hubbers who have proven themselves could be invited to join ... leaving their current hubs in place, and writing new content for the new site. HP could use the same technology, but package it differently.
Paul, I sincerely hope you are considering this option. And, if so, I hope you are also considering:
- NOT promoting it as a site for writers (and inviting the same problems HP experiences)
- NOT making it easy for thieves to identify it, follow it, and steal from it
- Therefore, making it an 'invitation only' site
- NOT having an open forum, but instead having a private forum where writers can discuss issues and share ideas safely ... without fear of who has access to what is written in the forum
- Having confidence that search engines will send traffic because you've invited good writers to join the site.
I don't think it would be fair to remove hubs, but I certainly believe it would be easier to group trusted hubbers in a new location than to clean up the problems with HP. I'm sure there are many hubbers who would benefit from a safer, cleaner environment in which to write.
For what it is worth, I also believe the criteria for inviting writers to join such a site should not merely be based on current traffic statistics. I've seen some impressive work by hubbers who don't seem to make money here. Given the right kind of supportive environment however, where other writers could offer feedback and hints in a private forum without drawing outside attention to specific articles, I suspect they'd have a very different outcome.
I think it would be exciting. I hope I'd get an invite.
The problem with creating new structures is very simple. The bottom line is people disappear from a website when they lose confidence in it.
As soon as people experience change and/or things they don't like - especially anything that involves a lot more effort on their part additional to significant effort expended in the past - then people tend to sit and think very hard about two options....
In a nutshell the issue comes down to whether or not you want to expend effort on:
1) another person's website - with uncertain return and no control over how that website works
2) your own website - where you have total control over how it operates - and uncertain return too.
One of the variables which influences which way people jump is their level of confidence in their own abilities to develop a new website(s). Those who hate code and technology and techie things to think about tend to stick with the site hosted by somebody else. In reality, it's a lot simpler to set up your own website than people think.
The net result is that a new site belonging to somebody else (over which you have no control) has to have a very, very attractive offer for it to compete with the alternative option of setting up your own site.
I have not had any great success here, traffic or otherwise; nonetheless, I've received a lot of positive feedback and helpful pointers from the other people here.
Bottom line--I enjoy the community, and will probably stay, even if I give up on writing, because I feel some of the people here have become long-distance friends.
But I have neither the know how nor the energy to expend on trying to make my own site. I can't even keep up with my blogs, which are badly neglected. I have too much else on my plate at home.
Then there's the promotion issue; getting traffic to the new site. I get some here, even if it is not spectacular. As I've said several times before, my sales and promotion skills are so bad I would be unable to sell tissues to someone with a nosebleed.
So, I'm sticking it out, and waiting to see what happens.
Exactly who are the 'cream' and how many numbers are we talking about?
sallybea: With your 99 I would expect you to be. What is considered good traffic numbers? So many
a year? A month? What is a good average? I heard your hubber could be high while your hubs score could be low. Where would the cutoff line be? 70 80 90 ave,?
I don't think Score would be the criteria, it is more likely to be based on how much money you make for the site. No-one knows how those scores are achieved anyway. I still consider myself to be a Newby but thanks for the compliment.
It would be nice if Paul would clarify those numbers, but I don't think he has thought this idea through completely at this point. It would also be nice to see a chart showing the percentages of people that earn different amounts.
The whole thing is not about scores or page views. It is about earnings. A hand full of people here do well, but the great majority do not. I'd really like to see those figures because it would help all of us understand what is really going on right now.
http://relache.hubpages.com/hub/Improve … b-Earnings
This post by relache will give you a fairly good idea about earnings. According to what it says with 444 people responding, 59% of those who responded are averaging less than $10 per month and 3% are averaging $2,000 or more per month.
Right now there are 60,405 users. This means that 35,639 writers here are making less than $10 per month and 1,812 are making more than $2,000 per month.
It should be noted that her chart shows that 39% of the people writing here have been here less than 6 months, while 7% have been here more than 3 years. So 66% of the newbies probably comprise the majority of those with the lowest earnings.
Of course with only 444 people responding, I'm not sure as to how well these numbers correlate with the reality, but they seem quite telling to me. It's possible that that top three percent may be the main thing holding this site together!
If this is the case, it is no wonder why Paul wants to make them the best they can be!
I do wonder at the accuracy of the poll as much of the info is not current.
That, too, sallybea--but I also don't think the low-earnings numbers reflect only newbies. I've been here 4 years, and I would jump up and down for joy if I made as much as $10 a month!
As it is...well (since we are not supposed to get into our specific earnings)...let's just say at this point, I'm lucky to reach the payment threshold twice a year....and it's falling steadily.
Hmmm... Yeah, I'm not so sure about 444 people being a good sampling of responses for this site. I think there are a whole bunch of us who make at least a hundred or more dollars a month give or take - and a few hundred is not an unreasonable goal for someone doing this part time.
I make good money off of my evergreen articles and don't make hardly any money off of ones that are not. If no one is searching for your article topic, you haven't got a shot at making anything anywhere. If you are not making money, it is not HP's fault, sorry.
They come up high enough in the search engines if they are worthy articles and have good SEO. The problem is - do people click on them just because they can see it to be a 'Hubpages' article?
That is when our 'bad writing reputation' starts to affect us all. Some people don't even bother to click on the link because they are sure it isn't going to be worth reading. Of course they are wrong many times... but the many definitely affect the few, in this case.
I checked your profile and see why you are making that much, even with only 23 hubs. Your mattress articles are loaded with info that many people crave and since you advertise yourself as an ex mattress salesperson, you also have credibility. I'm guessing these are your highest performing hubs because they also are evergreen.
It is very difficult for most people to put their expertise together with a topic that really serves the public and also do a good job of writing it. That's why, I think, so many here do poorly when it comes to income.
Why do you feel the blogs are worthy of being maintained, then? I have closed down three or four blogs over the last few years as the internet has got tougher. I find it's a very bad idea to leave old blogs "live" if they're not working - they hang over your head! If you don't look at them, you feel guilty about "neglecting" them: if you do spend time on them, it's time completely wasted.
I know it's hard to delete writing you've worked hard on - but what I did was move the good material to Hubs before I deleted the posts (I just left the Hubs unpublished for a fortnight or so, to give the blog time to disappear from Google). And in fact, when I looked back at the blogs I realised much of it really wasn't worth the effort of saving, anyway, so it wasn't that much work.
You make a good point, Marisa, as always. I have 4 blogs that are totally neglected at this point. No new posts in well over a year.
However, I don't think much of the material would make for good hubs, either. I may just copy/paste it into a file on my computer, simply so I don't just throw away those efforts.
Who knows: they may be the inspiration for an e-book someday...since the open Internet is apparently dead or dying as a place to write anymore.
Story of my life; a day late and a dollar short--always coming into some new and seemingly exciting venture just as it's winding down and going away...
You could always leave the blogs there for a little extra backlink and traffic forwarding. Decide to add to them once a year only. I've done that before with blogs I've given up on. No point in losing ANY link juice, no matter how small. Just add a post once a year, one good post and leave it up if it doesn't cost anything! After several years, you'll have quite a good blog with seven very nice posts on it.....
I agree - I suggested this, too, at least three years ago. The site has a good inventory of high-quality articles that suffer from the stigma of being mixed in with a ton of crap that they still can't ferret out. On top of that, the door is open for anyone who wants to sign on, and we still see junk that gets through the review process, or hubs that are copied from textbooks, etc.
HubPages could benefit from a new name and new branding. The word "Hub" does not mean anything other than the center of a wheel to most people. A new site could have a better name and better branding, and a far better screening process.
Agreed--I thought it was an odd name back when I signed up in the first place!
And I don't know how the crap still gets through; apparently, for all their emphasis on passing the "QAP," that tool isn't worth much.
I constantly see articles written in abominable English--poor grammar, spelling, wrong word choices, etc.--and it got through. Ditto for super-short, worthless "hubs" with little information, as well as obviously spun content, and other, longer articles that are so full of keyword-stuffing as to be obvious to a kindergarten child!
I bet any one of us could easily ferret out more crap than the QAP tool!
That, and the people who come into the forums with questions about improving their articles, with the very questions written in such poor English that it is tempting to answer, "First, learn to write proper English." I usually ignore those questions, because my reply would not be polite.
I have been fortunate, earnings have increased throughout my two and a half years here. It would be a sad day indeed if it all ended after having put so much effort into my writing here.
Ignore forum chatter, value your own experience and knowledge over rumours and gossip, and only believe it when Paul announces it.
Just my opinion.
I intend to. Can't see why he would say he was employing an additional member of staff if he intended to throw in the towel now.
Thing is whatever happens next - it's very unlikely that there will be a lot of time between the announcement and when it happens. I speak from experience re the Squidoo wind down. Yes we had a place to go and no we didn't have much time to get everything backed up and sorted ready for transfer.
So be prepared for change and recognise that diversification is just a sensible option.
All your eggs in one basket is NEVER a sensible approach to investment of time, effort or money.
That's exactly the same message that HubPages needs to ponder on.
Bottom line, no enterprise can keep going if it's not making money. It really doesn't matter how much people who don't care for other options for writing online like the community here. If they are not making a decent contribution to the overheads then chances are at some point they may no longer have an organisation to participate in.
Somebody has to pay the bills. You can pay them via advertising or via membership subscriptions (to throw in a curve ball) but the reality is there has to be a healthy revenue stream.
If the old ratio holds true it's very probably that just 20% of the members will be making 80% of the income....
If I was looking at it in purely business terms and wanted to draw a line - I'd probably draw the line at something like $100+ per Month which amounts to something between 10-15% of those answering the polls depending on when they answered and whether they told the truth.
People making that sort of money typically know what they're doing, how to produce quality and how to be legit. That reduces overheads at a stroke....
Hmm ... I can't help but wonder how many readers get distracted by the 'Write for HubPages' button at the top of all our hubs when they find us via search engines.
What a shame it doesn't automatically open in a new tab, instead of taking potential readers away from our pages.
However it seems HP is very committed to attracting new writers, so they clearly have a long-term strategy for the site's survival.
I don't know where you are getting your info from, but no actions taken in the last two years give ANY indication there is a strategy in play here. It's entirely reactionary here at present, this site is not ahead of the eight-ball.
They are scrabbling, trying to keep doing what they have been doing for years and the business model they are pursuing is dying.
What part of Google declaring war on content farms years ago is still unclear to people here?
Hardly a fiery death for the better run content farms just yet.
About.com is US rank 22, HP is 97
It is hard to imagine too many hubbers getting a better ranking with their own private websites, Will.
Didn't you mean scrambling??
I accept you don't agree with their strategy, Relache, but there's certainly evidence HP's been making a very real effort to address problems and issues as they arise. Actions may have been largely reactionary, yes, but when facing any kind of 'attack', an effective strategy is most needed.
I'm happy to give them credit for their efforts. Those of us who are fortunate enough to continue receiving payment every month should, I believe, be grateful ... and supportive.
I'm one of the many who complain about things I'm not happy with, but I like they way our voices are heard. Happy to see our stats being updated regularly, updates made to recent changes (thinking specifically of the 'Groups' change to reintroduce the full list of groups) etc.
Trying to keep hubbers happy is clearly one part of their current 'strategy'. I believe they are actively trying to make the site workable and not have us abandon ship. Let's hope they are successful.
If they're going to separate out some of the content for its own site it should be all the 'poetry' word vomit. At any given moment the front page feed is 1/4 - 1/3 poetry, most of it terrible. As "Diana" has persistently demonstrated, anything can pass QAP if it's classified as poetry. That's a QAP loophole that really needs to be stoppered.
I love Diana. It's no secret.
Her poetry is better than most, actually. Seriously.
It's obvious who dislikes poetry as an entire category of literature.
I agree, there is some true slop here that tries to pass itself off as poetry, but again, I suppose this is a subjective judgement.
I like poetry, but not all poetry. I like Robert Frost, but I'm not a huge fan of Shakespeare, for one example.
@ SmartAndFun -- is "Diana" her full user name here? I'd like to check out her work.
Enlighten me who dislikes poetry as an entire category of literature.
I do when you are required to memorize it in high school. What good is poetry anyway for the average person? I like controversial and help type hubs. And I care more for the help side than the literary
B.S. I went to a high school only requiring 1 year math, 1 year science and 3 years English, 3 years
history and related. This was back in the 60,s. No wonder the other countries have left us in dust in math, science and mechanics! No shop classes either.
Out friend, Diana? No! Seriously, have you missed her? Username dianafkingfyre
Wow--apparently HP did not agree. I just tried to check out her page, and got "User has been banned from Hub Pages." !!!!
Ms. Lizzy, the Diana account is comedic relief (in my opinion). I find her hilarious but that's just me. I'm assuming I'm in the minority.
I keep seeing the words "Hubpro Cream" on my screen and thinking it's some sort of remedy from the drugstore.
I wish we had a Like button on these forums.
It's available in my local Boots, between the Imodium and the haemorrhoid ointment
I signed into HP on a whim to look at my account, and found this thread. Reading between the lines, it sounds as though acquiring all those Squidoo lenses has done nothing for HP's income.
Now that my Adsense and Amazon earnings have virtually hit zero, I think I will be taking down my remaining hubs and either retiring them altogether or putting them on my own sites (not that I make anything off those either, but hey ho).
PS: Evening all
Maybe it's because there was a handful of great Squidoo stuff and a bunch of dross? Kinda like the same mix we already had at HP anyway? (Seems to be the same on all content farms without very high entry filtering and moderation). All the stuff which didn't engage an audience....and made them click away, annoying Google. Much of it was probably in good English, and pretty, but useless.
Seriously, there needs to be something done about the dross besides offering the rewriting of it.
Wouldn't it be funny and kudos if a split into two separate sites did eventuate, if the one less moderated that would contain most of the creative writing, short fiction, poetry etc turned out to be the more popular of the two and gained Google preference. Just imagine!
It would never, ever happen Jodah. Poetry, creative writing and fiction are not successful online, unless they are on specialist sites devoted to that style of writing. That has been well known for a long time!
It costs nothing to dream, Jodah!
Further evidence of what a lovely, creative imagination you have. If anyone can do it, it will be you!
Yes I am a dreamer LongTimeMother and proud to be one. The world would be a boring place without the dreamers and those who see the world a little differently. Long live creativity and artistic expression. If Hub Pages becomes only a "how to" site with hubs eg. "Five Creative Ways To Tie Shoelaces" or "10 Tips for Making Quick Money without Using Your Brain"..well, I'll be going elsewhere (as some others would be happy to see, and have actually suggested). Surely the Internet is already saturated with places to find the answers to inane questions. Thanks for having faith in my ability, or should I say perseverance in the face of seemingly impossible odds.
What makes you think people would be happy to see you leave? You are a wonderful writer who some day likely will be famous. Never, never give up.
I'm an old lady who has been around for a very long time. So I know these things lol! I also am a poetry lover (and writer, although I do not post my work here), and know good stuff when I see it.) I'll keep my fingers crossed for you.
Jodah, if some people suggest you should go elsewhere then I'm positive it is NO reflection on your ability. It's just facing the reality of writing on the internet - and it has nothing to do with people being philistines, either.
It's just that it's not easy to search for creative writing or poetry on Google. What do you search for? What you WANT to search for is probably "inventive and inspiring fiction" or "beautiful poetry" - but that kind of search won't find you specific pieces of creativ writing or poems, it will bring up articles ABOUT those things. So you can try "poems about cats" or "short story about fish" but that won't help you sift through the rubbish poems and stories.
So, what happens is that people will go to sites where they know they can find those things - poetry sites for poetry, creative writing sites for creative writing, short story sites for short stories, etc. No one, except other members, would think of HubPages as a place to find those things.
Unfortunately I don't know of any poetry/creative writing/fiction sites that pay their writers, but if you want your creative work to be read, you are likely to find far more readers in those places.
Thanks Marissa, I know what you say does make a lot of sense. I do belong to a couple of poetry specific sites but they just lack that sense of community and belonging that you get at Hub Pages. I tend to write and think with my heart not my head I guess. I will be sticking around here for as long as the site goes on and occasionally post a poem elsewhere. I guess it's that poetry started out as my niche but isn't anymore, but I like to keep most of my writing together in one place..and you are right it does earn a few bucks here whereas most others you really have to pay to get full benefit.
One of the things about poetry is that there are far more poets than audience, in real life and on the net. Your poetry is funny and interesting and stands out to me, but I cannot say the same for the other 1001 poems I have read on here. Whether it's quality poetry or crappy poetry, they are all fighting for a very small pie.
Poetry that tends to get read more by the general public includes Valentine's poems and wedding poems or life poems, which people can put in cards and print out for their loved ones, to save themselves writing one. I have seen successful poetry sites built on these niches, where poetry provides great thoughts and a good sense of humour in the work, that people want to share because it says what they want to say in a clever way.
Life definitely needs creative souls of all sorts!
People who do want to read quality poetry look for places where it hangs out. Unfortunately, there's a lot of places out there that like to put the dross alongside quality poets. I really like your profile and Billybuc's one with all the amusing and funny writing on it. Unfortunately, not many people aspire to the kind of quality you and Billybuc do and not many try to cultivate a real audience with their works or they would soon learn whether they have what it takes and most of them don't
No one thinks you should leave at all. But I think HP does need to assess the merit of how poetry entertains an audience on here and efforts of the poets to build a real audience as there is a lot of poetry that doesn't attract any audience at all and was purely written to pump up page numbers and provide more feathering for profiles with a quick SEO scramble. The number of quickly scribbled haikus published on here is staggering...and I've only read a handful that actually did it for me.
As someone who was a poet for about 10 years and was paid for every poem of mine published (about 55 - internationally), I can say that the audience for poetry is very small. It's usually other poets who will enjoy quality work - they are still a viable audience, but need to be cultivated into finding your good work and communicating with you (I'm sure you and Billybuc have this sorted). I think HP should assess poets based on their audience building and involvement in the writing community, as well as the dedication to the written word on their profiles (eg they focus all on poetry or all on writing) - which is a true indicator of ever-learning, quality poets worth publishing. This would remove all the crap (including my sad, lone poem on here) that just isn't going to make any money or views from an internet audience.
Maybe assess the poets, give the good ones a badge and make them Featured Poets who are the only ones allowed to publish poetry and get rid of the rest if it isn't performing? HP could save a lot of money on hosting fees.
Then again, if we apply these strict rules.....it could be too hard to attract any new quality writers in the first place....
Thanks for the kind words about my work Suzanne. Your suggestions are good and I know you are right when you say that a lot of poetry on Hub Pages is rubbish and only used to make up hub numbers. I can't believe there are hubs published with just one haiku poem or one Limerick. I have written both but publish a collection of 10 or so in one hub and usually add additional text, videos etc. I also write poetry (for money) on request for people at another site which is proving quite popular and I am beginning to have trouble keeping up with the orders.
Currently only about a third of the hubs I write are poetry hubs and basically I write them here to please my followers (of which I have around 550) who enjoy them and usually to convey a message or cause I care about (admittedly that may be more effective elsewhere but I do share them on Twitter, Facebook, Google+, Pinterest.) If I wrote only poetry I would do it elsewhere but it's just part of my portfolio. When I joined Hub Page about six years ago I recall it being advertised as a site and community for "writers" that didn't state a specific type of writing, genre etc. If it had said "creative writing, fiction and poetry is not encouraged" I would never have joined. Oh, I am honoured that you list me in the same status as Billybuc's..thanks, that is high praise.
Can we make a differentiation between all the extra stuff that hp likes us to add and the heart of the matter. Good poetry is good poetry
whether it is merely a haiku or merely a short form piece or merely three lines. Good poetry touches something inside us that doesn't need a video or other padding to make it more attractive the question here on hp is that of money and good poetry has never been a money maker. So maybe we should make artistic choices that are true to ourselves. At least those poets here who value their work. I don't want to defend my work here. It want to write good poetry whether here or elsewhere. So let's get real about what that is and what that isn't.
Yes, you are right Audrey, and you do write quality poetry. I admit I have made a lot of compromises here to make mine try to meet as many guidelines as possible and to be treated the way other hubs are, so each to his own. I admire you for being true to the art and not relying on all the bells and whistles. I find it a challenge to myself to try and keep all my hubs featured..but that's just my personal incentive, not the money. I can make more answering a couple of surveys a week than I do here.
The bells and whistles to writing poetry hubs are based on HP's notion of engagement. Good poetry will engage people without all that. HP does need to allow freedom from that and carry Featured Poets (but not everyone). The alternative is what we have today - lots of useless poetry taking up space and only a handful of dedicated authors correctly on the poetry path, hindered by the extraneous stuff.
e.e.cummings would never write a hub around his poem because it would kill the impact. He is one of my favourite poets and one of the most lauded experimental poets in writing circles, of all time. He would not believe in bells and whistles, were he here today, but his poetry is engaging, especially for non poets and his books still sell well worldwide. e.e.cummings is an example of an experimental poet that should be carried by HP, free from the chains of pretendy "engagement"
Suzanne, if HP would indeed carry the quality poets (assuming I would fall into that category) I would certainly not spend so much time searching for photos, videos and the like, which take up much more time than writing the poems. I agree good poetry should stand alone and at first I fought against having to add all the extras, eventually compromising myself to keep HP, and other hubbers who don't give poetry any value, happy.
What do other hubbers that don't care for poetry do to hinder you? I don't see where if I don't read poetry that it has much effect on you.
You don't Doug as far as I know, it is only those who continually comment about poetry bringing the site down, not having a place here, hub hopping and automatically giving any poetry hubs bad ratings etc. It is why I try to write poems that may appeal to those who don't normally like poetry and to make my hub visually appealing. Those who don't like to read poetry but still appreciate that it has a place and that other people do enjoy it are fine by me.
I think there is a place for creative writing, fiction, poetry, religion and so on here. But it should be quality.....otherwise it's just filling up the internet with fluff and causing us headaches with Google.
Good to hear you are getting lots of orders! I know I'm enjoying your social media shares too, very funny and entertaining....
Some interesting information to toss into the mix is from the Topic Tree (08/08/15) is there were 804,409 Hubs listed. Of those 62,839 were listed under the main category 'Books, Literature, Writing'. That is 8% of all Hubs.
Of those the Poem & Poetry Sub-Category has 6,521, which is 0.8% of all Hubs. Those also include articles about poetry. In the Commercial & Creative writing Sub-Category there are a total of 11,575 Hubs or 1.4%. Those without a sub-category classifier & sub-categories creative writing, fan fiction & flash fiction account for 7,353 or 0.9%. So, total creative type writing appears to be only 2.2%.
That can be verified by anyone. Here is the link;
We are hardly saturating the market then Tsmog, are we?
I want to see statistics about how many Aussies are writing here, Jodah. We are doing a pretty good job of saturating this thread. lol. You, me, Suzanne, Marisa ...
I often see hubs from Australians, and I just spotted another Aussie on a different forum thread.
I'm thinking it might almost be time to send a helpful email to HubPro editors about how aussies, kiwis and brits spell. And how we always put a space before and after an em-dash.
Yes LTM, I was beginning to get concerned that I seemed to be taking over this thread and taking it off track when it wasn't specifically concerning poetry You are right though, it is saturated with Aussies and I personally only know eight other Aussie hubbers all up. It would be interesting to find out the actual statistics of how many of us there are. I was also wondering if Hub Pro do edit our hubs would our spelling be changed to American English? Never even thought about the em - dash.
I have seen at least 20 Australians here over the years. As for the spelling, I generally steer away from distinctive words and use hues instead of colours, and preferred instead of favourite. Occasionally I'll use American spelling, depending on the topic, but never when writing about kangaroos and wombats!
I don't recall if any of my spelling was changed, but the lack of em-dash spacing was torture!
Us Aussies are such hard workers!
I'm targeting the Oz market generally, so the spelling is fine for that. If I was lusting after US views in a big way, I'd need US English....so maybe Hubpro might shed some light on whether it would be more profitable or not, depending on relevant subject matter.
I must confess I've never ever understood why HubPages was seen as a place to write poetry or creative stories.
I have a friend who is a well known author and as, as result, I've come across a number of very active writers groups where members post links to their latest new piece of writing and it gets shared around and/or critiqued on a regular basis. They seemed very buzzy and productive places to me. Much more helpful to those who want to write......
Mind you all the members seemed to want to get published too - so they can enjoy the benefits of becoming a New York Times listed author
I don't get it either and when anyone mentions it a bunch of HP-"published" poets come of the woodwork to beat their chests about being persecuted.
A person serious about poetry would not post it on a content farm that does not have even the most basic weed-out filter for poetry, and moreover does not support rich formatting for poets like indentation. They would not have it published alongside a trollerific acrostic poem titled "My Butt Itches."
A person serious about their poetry would be submitting it to small arts magazines, literary journals, zines and publishing their own chapbooks (as they are called in the US). Or at the very least they would publish it online on their own site.
The "poets" that HP attracts are by-and-large non-native English speakers as you can see from the front page feed.
I have written scads of poetry over the years; I have binders full.
A small portion of it, I have shared here on HP.
But I do not in any way fit the characterization you have placed in your closing sentence.
No, I'm not actively trying to market it, save for one collection, that will become an e-book. I merely wished to share with folks here who I consider friends, or at least with whom I'm on friendly terms.
I have also read the offerings of several others here, who also do not fit your limited view of who the poets here are. Please do not paint us all with the same brush, just because you don't happen to like poetry.
Stage 1 of a Split could well be the shift of all Hubpro edited pages to "Editors Choice" under the 'mother' URL (hubpages(dot)com) rather than the subdomains. Perhaps this is already happening?
Squidoo tried something along those lines. It didn't work.
Just supposing the poets and their work were hived off onto a separate site dedicated to creative writing and poetry - and the deal was that they had to fund their overheads from their earnings.
How long do you think it would last?
See my post above. Featured Poets only (quality poets who are amusing, entertaining, witty and interesting) get carried as they increase the engagement factor on the site when found, the rest is dumped because they are unengaging and indicate a spammy site to Google.
Note to Paul: If Hubpro is helping because of the engagement factor, maybe unfeaturing all unengaging hubbers (ie low engagement across their entire profile) might be way to go to eliminate dross. Even the good hubbers will have some low performing hubs, but eliminating those who consistently produce bad content that doesn't engage might be the answer.
Just supposing somebody set up a website for authors and the condition for entry is you have to know how to write the Queen's English!
Imagine! The racism!
Alternatively, why isn't someone setting up Hubpages India in native Indian tongue? Or any other languages? They'd make an absolute killing!!!
I have always had a problem with the idea that traffic equals quality. Traffic is usually dependent on choosing popular topics and effective keywords. If you choose an obscure topic with few searches or you write well on an oversubscribed one without the benefit of a technical understanding of what drives traffic you will not have a high traffic page. I have often thought the selection of good by using criteria for popular was suspect. Surely a better idea long-term would be to find good articles and edit them to make them easier to find rather than assume popular pages are always the most worthy. Sometimes they are, but there are many that are not and those are the low satisfaction pages that may drag everyone down.
You are right about popular not being the best. In the U.S most have heard of starrett micrometers.
Most think they are the best. Those that really know micrometers say a couple other brands are much better. I have never heard of those other brands because they are not common here.
I agree with this too. I think that the best measure of a hub's quality is engagement (time spent on the page by the audience). This indicates whether they wanted to read all of it through to the end because it was a great read, or whether they clicked away because it was useless and boring.
Traffic is not a good indicator of quality, but traffic is what brings the $. So making sure hubs have the best engagement is what will hold people on the site and hubs with good traffic are gateways for funnelling traffic here.....though whether that traffic is happy or not is another story and should be taken on a case by case basis. Hubs with good indication of engagement will hold the traffic once it is received, hence we should all strive for excellent engagement as well as traffic.
Traffic equals income. period.
No it doesn't.
You need the right sort of traffic (ie people who are actually interested in your topic) - and enough of it - and then you need the right sorts of HIGHLY RELEVANT links which generate income for you.
How much traffic you need varies hugely depending on a topic. I've had lots of income from some sites which get relatively little traffic - because I fulfil a need for a highly niche topic that other sites do not satisfy
That's true. Until recently, my blogs always got far less traffic than my Hubs and yet the income from my blogs was far higher, i.e. the income per visitor was far superior.
However as you say, I feel that's due to having a specialist site where the visitor is more likely to linger and browse around and therefore find what they want, because there are so many links and products on the site relevant to their topic of interest. I don't see how HubPages can achieve that when there is no focus.
I see your point, but try making money without traffic. That's the point I was trying to make. Of course you need more than just that, but without it, "you got nuthin".
I would support the split and have thought HubPages should do this for quite a while.
I stopped writing because I put so much effort into my articles to have them dragged down by crap -- political arguments that don't make sense, stories about what someone did that day, and articles written just to earn a buck (but have no aspect of quality in them.)
I agree with this decision.
It's not a decision it's just an idea at this stage, and one of several alternatives which HubPages is considering.
You can have a good site without a "good level of engagement" insofar as whatever is considered good will vary hugely depending on the topic and how micro niche it has gone.
There again you can have a good site which is very popular because HubPages applies a rule to it which does NOT EXIST within the Google Quality Rater Guidelines - and the site becomes unpublished.
Do we want to trust HubPages with making the decision about what is good?
Or would we rather than that discussion direct with Google? I know which I prefer - but then that conclusion is derived from the fact that Google is now loving the content which HubPages decided to unpublish.
@Makingamark, these are some of the reasons I no longer have content on HP. I really wanted it to work, and I did everything I could to re-write, edit, and comply with all the things HP wanted. But it was never enough.
Funnily enough, the unpublished stuff that worked with Google had good engagement and traffic was irrelevant....
One of the things I like about having a website rather than a webpage is that when I create a topic on that website I can layer the information starting with an introduction - which then indicates categories and links to sub-pages. For very large topics (which I seem to specialise in) it makes it so much easier for people to read and find what they want.
I think HubPages is maybe better for the shorter more superficial or very, very specific content rather than the solid comprehensive content on a niche topic which is possible when you have your own website
That's partly because the links at the top of the right hand column to other hubs are to wholly unrelated hubs (even if they are the same category). The author who writes a cluster of hubs around one specialist topic has no easy opportunity to show that to visitors - as for example I could do on Squidoo and did so most successfully.
The links that do that are far too far down the hub.
This is exactly why they should switch the way they position them.
by Steve Andrews 10 years ago
When it was first introduced I was annoyed by it but made an effort to tweak my hubs to get them out of Idle status. Now, a whole load have got zzs against them again and many of them are hubs that at one point were very successful and even now still have scores above 70 or higher.One of the hubs...
by Will Apse 9 years ago
In his hub 'What We Don't Know About Google Panda?', Paul Edmondson points out that Google seems to expect sites to leap high above any bar that might reasonably be set for quality purposes.Paul seems less than happy with Google's attitude. He seems to think that if a page can somehow limp over...
by Eric Dockett 8 months ago
I don’t want to make too big a deal of this. My interactions with editors over the past few years have been very positive and I appreciate their work. There are some excellent people on the HP editorial staff today.However, I think there is always room for improvement, suggestions, and constructive...
by Samantha Cubbison 2 years ago
Hello Community, In conjunction with our Network Site improvements, we are migrating hubpages.com content to our new frontend platform. As we continue to roll out upgrades, we’ve introduced the notion of a subdomain: discover.hubpages.com. The new discover.hubpages.com will host all content that...
by topclass 10 years ago
Many good quality pages are Idled (become unfeatured) via ‘Analysis of the how engaged readers are with a Hub over an extended period of time’ – essentially because they get low traffic.It appears that this process was initiated to reduce the number of ‘low quality’ pages on the site. The concept...
by Dr. John Anderson 7 years ago
PanQualGuin - Google's New Secret Traffic Quota ManagerThere has been a lot of fuss about the recent so-called Quality update to the core Google algorithm. see: http://searchengineland.com/the-quality … -up-221118and: http://searchengineland.com/google-we-a … ter-221331A big G...
Copyright © 2023 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
Copyright © 2023 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective owners.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|