I've been feverishly updating my old Hubs, not so much on this account but on my big niche account, in hopes that they will be noticed and moved to a niche site. But, it appears this process has come to a dead stop.
It is extremely disheartening to think older, quality Hubs can only be up for consideration every 60 days, while lower-quality new Hubs are moved right over. Are moderators/curators/whoever still looking at old Hubs to move?
Also: When a moderator/curator/whatever chooses to move a new Hub over, are they looking to see if there are quality Hubs on the same or similar topic already in existence still on HubPages? If there are, shouldn't those older Hubs be moved instead of the new one?
I know this is a new process, but I sincerely hope HP shortens the 60-day policy for requesting moves to niche sites. Or, gets back to looking at old Hubs on a more frequent basis.
It's hard to see the value in making edits and updates when Hubs are ignored anyway.
We will be working on the backlog in the next few weeks. We have been focused on new and submitted for the last two weeks while we organize the team. We just hired more curators, and once trained they will be helping our current curation team with the selection. Don't worry, we will get to the Hubs you have edited and improved.
Yes, we are working on the ability to ramp up selection from the backlog with a new system we've been developing. It's a few weeks out. We are also hiring more people. We are very pleased with the results and the backlog selection will speed up.
If you are updating and fixing up articles, I suspect the effort will be very fruitful. Really good articles will move with the least amount of contingencies in the new system.
Thanks for posting about your efforts. We definitely want to reward that with quicker selections.
Glad to hear this. I have been updating continuously ever since you first announced the niches and also have been waiting for my hubs to move on up. Those that have already moved into the niches have done well, so obviously I'd like you to take as many as possible. Thanks for all your hard work.
One thing to remember is that they're trying to avoid internal competition on the niche sites.
We saw an example of that with Jodah - he had a recipe for scrambled eggs that was up for consideration, but it was decided that there were already too many scrambled egg recipes on the niche site so they wouldn't take another one.
So I'm assuming that if you wrote a Hub about a specific thingamybob to install on your RV, and there's already a Hub about that specific thingamybob on the niche site, your Hub wouldn't get moved no matter how much you upate it.
At least that's my understanding, it would be interesting to know if it's right.
According to Robin, a page will not be excluded because it covers a topic already covered on a niche site: http://hubpages.com/community/forum/137 … ost2832306
So someone is confused, somewhere.
Thanks Robin and Paul. I really appreciate your responses.
Again talking about my big niche account: It's very frustrating to update my Hubs and have them sit, while at the same time another Hubber is pumping out Hub after Hub of low-quality content that gets immediately moved over to a niche site.
I've done well on this site, and I am very grateful for the opportunity HP has given me. I can think of no other place online where I could have accomplished what I've done here. So, I don't mean to complain, but I am also a busy person with a full-time job and a family. I have to choose how to spend my time on this site. I was under the impression that updating and improving Hubs was the best use of my time.
I very much intend to continue to contribute to HP into the far future, both with new Hubs and frequent updates to old. However, I need to know my efforts and time spent will pay off. I look forward to the system getting back on track.
I noticed that there was a button you can use to submit to niche sites. I used it one one hub. I tried a second but it said you could only do one every.... 60 days I think it said? Will this time frame be reduced when the new staff is trained?
Jodah was pretty emphatic that his page was not moved because the niche already had similar pages. I reckon that happened after Robin's post so it may be a policy change.
That's what I thought, and he based that conclusion on what was said in the email he received saying it had been declined.
I thought they weren't putting hubs on the same topic on niche sites too until one of my hubs was moved and another one from a different writer - on the same subject - was also moved to the same niche site. I had hoped at one point mine would be moved because the traffic to it hadn't been great - and I figured it was because of the other hub - a hub that was older than mine - that was on the same subject getting all the traffic. At any rate, traffic has improved for that hub, though most of it is internal traffic on the niche site.
The emails I received were quite contradictory. I think the main reason is that they appeared to be generically generated. The first said my hub was excellent and would be moved to the niche site as long as I took the suggestion of the curator and removed the poetry to it's own dedicated hub.
I didn't do as they suggested and instead just moved the poem from the start of the hub to the end, as removing it would have required me to change a lot of the wording throughout the hub. I also felt the poem was what made it unique from other "scrambled egg recipe" hubs.
I then resubmitted the hub for consideration and received an email back which included this: "Unfortunately your hub was not selected.... perhaps your article: is about a very general topic that is already extensively covered on Delishably or elsewhere online. Perhaps you can add a new spin on the topic to make it your own. If your article is a popular (e.g., chocolate chip cookies) recipe, adding gorgeous, original, step-by-step photos is a great way to make it stand out from the rest."
The curators have some discretion over the selections. If they feel a topic is over done, or nearly identical that may not select it.
That said, we've checked this many ways with Google and have been told near duplicates aren't an issue for us. So, if a really great piece of content is made that's very similar to an existing piece, it will likely get selected.
The issue I see with very similar articles is that it's up to Google to decide which one to show. Ideally the better article would rank, but that's not always the case.
This is something we will continue to watch and adjust how curators select.
I'm still wondering if curators are looking at quality Hubs that are still on HubPages on the same topic as a brand-new Hub they plan to move.
In other words, say someone has a good Hub on Blue Widgets that's three years old but still on HubPages because curators haven't gotten around to moving it (because they just aren't doing that right now for whatever unfathomable reason). Now another Hubber writes a brand-new Hub on Blue Widgets. Will the curators look for old Hubs and move them before moving the new Hub?
Based on a few experiences I've had over the past few months, I suspect the answer is no. Not only is that really, really not cool, but it opens the door for keyword poaching if the curators aren't paying attention (which it appears they aren't). And, will that old Hub later be denied because there's already a Hub on that topic (the new Hub) that has been moved to the niche site?
It isn't right for brand-new Hubs to move while older, quality Hubs on the same topic still linger on HubPages simply because curators haven't gotten around to looking at them. That's pretty disheartening for veteran Hubbers who have stuck it out with this site over the years through good and bad.
A newer Hub could have been written by a veteran Hubber and by chance happen to be on the same subject as an older one, and also be of higher quality than the older one; there are plenty of low-quality Hubs that are old. Also - and I'm not saying that you're saying this but others have implied it - a Hub written on the same subject as another Hub does not necessarily mean someone copied the same idea for a Hub. And, if people use keyword research to decide on subject matter, it is likely that there will be Hubs on the same subject. It seems to me the criteria for choosing Hubs for the niche sites should be based in quality and whether the information is original with depth.
But that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying older, quality Hubs are still stuck on HP simply because curators aren't bothering to look at them. Or, sometimes they have to endure a beating from an editor before they are moved.
Meanwhile, new Hubs on the same topic, often of lower quality, are moved over without batting an eye. Of course if an older Hub is lower quality it should not be moved, but that's not what I'm seeing happen.
It doesn't matter who wrote it or why. An older Hub of the same or higher quality on the same topic should always be moved before a new Hub. That's just fair.
When everything is done 'at scale' absolute fairness is likely to be a casualty. The 'submit to a niche site' can help with good pages that are overlooked for whatever reason. But only at the rate of one every two months. They should think about improving that rate as soon as they get through the backlog.
So, if I see a super-popular page on a niche and want to help myself to a piece of the pie, all I need do is write something better?
How about the 'The Auxiliary Airman's Diet'?
I was wondering if the staff was done looking for articles that we wrote at other times, and was just concentrating on new work. I have many pieces that I wrote, and moved over the years, or just wrote and didn't put anywhere. I've also been madly fixing old hubs and updating them. So my questions have been answered. I had so many moved each day for about a month, and now nothing, for at least a week. At least I know my work was not in vain now.
We hear you on wanting the existing articles curated. In the way we are building the systems, we are looking at new articles now and there is a pause on the backlog, but that will change shortly.
We should be able to make significant progress on the backlog, especially for articles that don't require edits or fixes. If you've got things in good shape, then they will start moving pretty quickly.
It's a major engineering and people project to get the system running. We appreciate that folks can see the benefits that the sites provide, so we want to help everyone we can, but at the same time we want these to succeed for the long haul. It's a substantial investment we are making in systems and hiring. While we expect a few bumps we hope the benefits continue for years to come.
I do appreciate the work you guys are doing and I know it is not an easy task. And I really, really appreciate how much better things are right now than they were a year ago. My kudos for HP staff far outweigh my complaints, believe it or not. But this is a very frustrating situation, and sometimes it seems like you guys don't think things through in a fair way.
Thanks for taking the time to respond, Paul, and for paying attention to my concerns.I do very much appreciate that as well.
It would help tremendously if the people you have doing the edits, do so correctly. In most instances they do, but recently I've been finding edits that should never have been done and also have been incorrect. As a former English teacher, it's easy for me to spot this type of thing, but I hesitate to make corrections without first asking permission to do so. This wastes a lot of time and can lead to problems for writers here. Some of your editors are great, but I'm seeing increasing problems like those I just mentioned here. I think you need more supervision in this area, at least for now. Either that, or allow writers who know how to do so to correct very obvious editing errors.
by Sondra Rochelle 2 years ago
Many of us here are working hard to upgrade our hubs so that they can be moved to the niche sites. I think it would be a good idea if those upgrades are viewed by the team the same way as new posts so that they can more quickly addressed. It's a shame to let much better upgraded...
by Cholee Clay 15 months ago
I'm curious if anyone knows if the new editors that were hired have completed the training and are on their own now, or if article standards have changed for some reason? The last few months I've had some very old and not updated articles moved to niche sites. I'm happy more of my articles are...
by Scott S Bateman 2 years ago
I'm very happy with the results of the niche sites. It's a win-win for HubPages and writers like myself. But I'm a bit curious about the process for choosing Hubs that go on those sites.One of my most successful Hubs on a niche site has more than 1,250 words, multiple photos and an original video....
by Dina Sostarec 3 days ago
Hi,Do more experienced Hubbers have any useful tips for getting your article moved to a niche site? I kept seeing advice that goes something like "make sure you write a high-quality article" but it just seems so vague to me. I have 9 articles now and the only one that was moved to a niche...
by Kylyssa Shay 3 years ago
I've noticed that I keep seeing HOTDs that fit the niche sites yet weren't chosen for the niche sites because they still have HubPages URLs. Why not save some time in the selection process for the niche sites and mine all the recent HOTDs and all of the Editor's Choice hubs for use on the niche...
by Scott S Bateman 10 months ago
I have been pleased with the audience and revenue for my articles on HubPages since joining the site some years ago.I commend the company for creating the successful niche sites at a time when similar sites were folding. My existing articles that moved to those sites have done even better than...
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|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.|