Hello Hubbers! I was wondering if there is a recommended maximum length for a hub? I started writing one, and then realized that I have enough information to write a book. So I decided to break the info into eight parts (translation: eight hubs). I started writing part one, then realized that i needed to split that into two parts, so I am actually working on part two first, and I'll go back and write part one later. Well, this particular hub is long already (1400 words) and I'm only halfway through it. Should I split it up even further, or keep going? How long is too long for a hub? Or should I just take all the information and actually write a book, lol.
I also have photos, a poll, and a video as well to help break up the different sections.
As far as I can tell, based on my own hubs, there's no maximum length and, if there is, 1,400 or even 2,800 words comes nowhere close. When my hubs were transferred over from Squidoo, one of them, the first chapters to a serialized novel, was over 40,000 words in length and it didn't even load slowly. I have since split it up and given each chapter its own hub for other reasons, but that's another story.
People bookmark and come back to information-dense hubs of mine with high word counts and they tend to get shared the most on social media and by online publications of all my hubs. So I'd suggest you write as much as you need to to thoroughly cover your niche topic in-depth. As long as you keep the focus tightly on your stated topic and only on your stated topic, take as many words as it takes.
I don't think there is a max rule, but I do use my own 5000-6,000 word rule for each hub. My hubs should never be over 6,000 words, regardless of topic. I had a hub 6500 and once I trimmed it down, it read far better. I might have a couple hovering at 7,000, which I will keep editing. As for minimum, 2500-3,000 is my floor.
I would break it up into hubs, but make sure each one stands on its own, and give each one a unique title that tells people what it is about.
I can tell you from a lot of research and experimentation that the number of people who exit an article grows the more they have to scroll.
So my suggestion is that you follow a common journalism practice of putting your best and most important information toward the top of the article and the least important at the bottom.
My suggestion is to create hubbooks. I have been doing this for awhile. Search on "How to create a hubbook". I call each hub a chapter and I have a Table of Contents hub that links to each chapter. I also provide navigation links to go from one chapter to the next. Each chapter should be around 2000-3000 words. BTW, it is also a good way to track hubs that are related to a topic. HubPages use to have Groups but they have discontinued it. A hubbook can group hubs of one topics in a easy to follow fashion. Good luck.
My own thoughts would be that if you have so much information on one topic, it would be worth turning it into a stand-alone website. But assuming you don't want to do that, then the most effective approach would be to split the subject up into 1,500 word segments.
I say that because many Hubbers have researched length over the years, and the 1,500 word length seems to be the "sweet spot". It's long enough to provide solid information but not so long that people's eyes start to glaze over! Go over that length and people have to scroll too far to find what they're looking for.
Be aware that there is a problem with writing a series on HubPages - navigation. If you create your own blog or website, you would still split your topic up into smaller articles, each covering a different aspect of the subject. Readers will arrive at one of the posts, having found it on Google - if that doesn't quite meet their needs or if they want to read further, then you'll have a menu in the sidebar listing all the categories or sections, so people can easily navigate around the whole site to find what they want.
Readers can't do that on HubPages. They'll arrive at one of the Hubs in the series, but if that's not quite what they want, they can't see a list of all the other Hubs in the series. You're not allowed to add a list in the Hub, either! What they do see is "Popular Hubs" and "Related Hubs", so they're more likely to click on those than to look for the other Hubs in your series. They won't even think to look at your profile and even if they do, they probably won't know how to search for the series in your list of Hubs.
If each Hub can stand on its own as well as forming part of the series, that may not matter, but it's something to think about.
Thank you so much for this information. You have great ideas!
Hmmm, I like the idea of creating a website just for this series. I never thought about that. Thanks for the idea.
Creating your own website isn't as hard as it sounds, but working out how to earn money from it is harder than it is on HubPages. In the long run you should be able to earn much better from your own site, but if you don't have time to invest in learning how to promote and monetize, you may be better to stick to HubPages where you'll start earning much sooner.
Has HP explicitly said they don't allow a list of links of related hubs we've written? Many top-notch writers on HP have lists of related work of theirs so I was under the impression that it was allowed.
It's something we all used to do, but it's no longer allowed because its regarded as overly promotional. I notice that such lists are not allowed on the niche sites - and since that's where the main income potential is, you don't want to create a Hub that might not be approved for the niche sites for any reason.
You will still see many Hubs with those lists on them, but that's just because they haven't been edited since the new standards came in.
I don't think it is not allowed. I have many hubs with table of contents. They may not be featured but I really don't care. I still prefer to have a hub that lists all my other hubs related to the same topic such as recipes or travel...This way, I have a dozen or so main hubs that tracks over 200 hubs.
I had one series of 8 hubs that were about 3,000 words each. They always were my most popular hubs, and were moved to a niche site. But that was a nightmare, getting them all moved so it would make sense. If you find people interested in your topic, it will do well. Now that the hubs are being moved to niches though, you may get stuck with part on HP and part on a niche site. If you cut them down in size, you are not allowed to link them. So unless the administration puts a picture of one of the related parts next to your first part, nobody will know it's a series. You have to tell your readers, in the summary, or in the first paragraph.
At election time in the U.S. I always interpret the astrology chart of the Democratic and Republican nominee. The ones from the last election are still getting traffic, after 4 years. I wrote about Hillary Clinton, 5600 words a few months ago..Readers have ASKED me to keep doing this.
The other day I did the same for Donald Trump, and within hours it was moved to Exemplore. I have asked the administration to move Hillary's, since they are a set, written in the same style. I'm being told that the images on Hillary's were pixellated, although they weren't, when the hub is in edit mode it tells you. So I put a few different images on it and moved a few around, no Amazon capsules are allowed anymore, and am awaiting an answer.
I was also told in the email that we are no longer allowed to choose a hub every 60 days to be moved to a niche site if it meets the criteria. I responded that we no longer know what the criteria is. Apparently we are not allowed ANY Amazon capsules anymore. Good luck to you.
I am not interested in the niche sites so much. I had a few hubs moved but my traffic did not increase. The main restriction of no links is a definite disadvantage. So far, I didn't see much other advantage of the niche sites. In addition, they don't seem to rank as high on google search page ranking. I much prefer the abilty to link related hubs so the reader can follow.
Links are restricted but they are not banned. If your links are directly relevant to the main subject of the Hub, they are allowed.
What HubPages doesn't like now is the Links Capsule being used to list several other Hubs, e.g. at the end of a Hub. I've had those removed even if the other Hubs are directly relevant.
As for whether the niche sites are better, it depends which sites your Hubs have been moved to. Where the niche sites have a coherent mix of subjects, they seem to be doing very well and traffic is up (e.g. PetHelpful). Where unrelated subjects have been shoehorned into a niche (e.g. Performing Arts in a niche site which is otherwise all about Games), one of two things happens - either Google ignores the section that doesn't fit, or penalises the whole site for including irrelevant material.
Thanks for the info. I had no idea the various niche sites are treated differently by google search. It does bring up the question of how effective are these transition to niche sites? I always believe there are more strength in numbers. I still like the old hubpages with all hubs under one roof and prefer they just divide up the topics in a more suitable way. I still have trouble choosing the category of some of my hubs, not sure where they fit...
Jacklee, I suggest you do some study on how Google works, as a Hubber it's a good thing to understand it.
Having all Hubs under one roof is exactly what Google hates - it doesn't matter how they split up the topics, Google disapproves of sites that don't specialise in one subject area and wants them gone.
Don't take my word for it - HubPages agrees with me, that's why they've given up on trying to make the main site work, and are putting all their efforts into creating the niche sites. They know that's what they must do to continue to get good Google traffic!
Where we disagree is the way that those specialist sites are being created. PetHelpful is an obvious example of a specialist site that makes sense: it's about pets. But look at HobbyLark: HubPages says it's about hobbies, but the word "hobby" is too vague: people do crafts as a hobby, and yet that's not on HobbyLark - but Performing Arts is, even though people don't always do that as a hobby, it's often a paid job. So my concern is that Google will look at sites like Hobbylark and think the mix of subjects isn't specialist enough.
Did they actually say in the email that no Amazon capsules are allowed? I have some Amazon capsules in Hubs that have been moved. I understood the rule was that they had to be very closely related to the subject, that's all.
I can still see the option to submit a Hub every 60 days. When you click the button to submit the Hub, it asks you whether the Hub meets the criteria, one by one.
I was online with Christy at the Administration, asking if my Trump/Hillary hubs could be together as companion pieces. They moved Trump to Exemplore hours after I posted it, and Hillary is the same, but is still on HP, published about 3 months ago.
I was told Editorial would decide. But that I had to take off my one Amazon hub. The hub was 5600 words. I was also told my pics were fuzzy, but in edit mode it didn't show any that way, so I know it was just an excuse. I changed a few pics and moved a few, but am awaiting an answer.
But I was told no Amazon capsules. I asked if we could have a new set of rules. And said that I and probably others have hubs they would publish, but they are being too unclear about the rules. I would take the Amazon capsules off. I use them very sparingly, in spite of my large word counts at times, so if I'm being told that, I think it's the new rule.
Oh, forgot, and about the button that supposedly will allow us to submit a new hub every 60 days. They are retiring this, as of now I believe.
I had a hub that I chose 56 days ago, and this began when I asked if I could change my mind and submit my Hillary hub in place of that. Christy said they weren't going to let us choose hubs to submit anymore. I asked again that they submit a new set of rules.
I'll be very annoyed if they don't move that hub. It takes about 12 hours to cast and interpret an astrology chart, and I have to spend a lot more hours tailoring it to fit with a format that will interest hub readers. I did this last year at US election time, and people have been begging me to do it again, even asking me to do other political figures, but I don't have time.
They better update the rules, they are playing us for fools.
Why don't you get your own website and organise your content as you see fit?
I've had my own sites, but am not very good a computer stuff. I'd rather spend my time writing, HP makes it easy since all we need is set up for us. I came here as a writer with almost no computer literacy, and have come a long way. But I'd rather just write.
I'm not angry with the staff. But I write about a topic where the hubs are connected, and by getting rid of links and splitting hubs on wrong niches, they have made it hard for me. All of what I post was written years ago, it's evergreen. If they get their act together and make rules again, I have many other hubs i could post.
I'd try my hand at a book before I'd waste time on another site. Thanks for your input.
Jean, I think it was explained to you before - the reason your Hubs were put on the "wrong" niches is that they were moved according to the category YOU chose for them on HubPages. For instance, I can see on your profile that most of your astrology Hubs are under Astrology, but several of them are under "Rich and Famous People"- which means there is no way they'll come up when moderators are searching for Hubs to move to Exemplore. In moving them to the sites they did, they were respecting the category choices you made! So if you want them considered for future moves I suggest you get the categories sorted out.
Looking at your profile, you should be flattered that such a large number of your Hubs have been moved, many Hubbers would be thrilled to have such a high success rate! I know it's irritating when you've written them as part of a longer series, but you have really done well to have so many accepted.
The new criteria are pretty clear, I think. When you submit a Hub under the 60-day rule (by clicking on the button at the top of the Hub), you're asked a series of questions to establish whether the Hub meets the criteria or not. Try it - it doesn't seem to me that they've changed much.
Do remember that most people are looking at Hubs on mobile devices now, so the photos show up full-width. Try clicking on the Preview button on a Hub then make sure it's in "Mobile" view, and you'll see how the photos look.
The main thing is that links and products have to be very, very closely related to the main topic of the Hub. And if you include an Amazon product, it must be very clear why it's relevant to the Hub, and you must say why you recommend that particular product, which means you need to know something about it - you can't just select a book at random.
I was not the one who chose a category of Rich and Famous People for ANY of my Astrology hubs. That was the first time the administration began to make changes in preparation for the niches, and they put them in the wrong category, one I never would have chosen. In fact, they went down my whole profile page and changed categories for ALL my hubs, many that were incorrect and I would not have chosen.
They were most definitely not respecting my wishes in any way.
I am pleased that I have had so many hubs moved to niche sites, and have expressed that over many times to the administration and on forums.
I have put larger pictures as wide as the text on most hubs after looking at them on my phone. I think they look good.
I didn't make any money on Amazon hubs, ever, so mostly stopped putting them on my hubs about a year ago. I don't care at all. Again, Christy, in the same email, told me that Amazon hubs would be eliminated. On a hub about Hillary Clinton, 5600 words, I did put one book, her latest, which I read and enjoyed, and thought it should have been acceptable, as she is running for President. And that certainly is above the accepted word count, wasn't it one Amazon hub per 100 words or something like that?
It is frustrating when rules are changing. I see now that Christy is saying I misunderstood about the button, but she told me that it was not being used any more. I don't save my emails long, but will look for it.
Another person wrote me a snarky forum answer, when I wanted all 12 Astrology signs in a series to be on the same site. Apparently in one out of the 12, I had one word in a different place, not making it impossible to realize it belonged with the others. Most of them were titled "Venus in Pisces Love Lives." Or whatever sign it was. One got switched and said, "Love Lives of Venus in Pisces People." Only a hopeless moron could think that one didn't belong with the others.
I feel like I'm being lectured all the time on these forums, when I haven't done anything wrong, and the administration lied to me about both the button changes to submit and Amazon capsules on them. It's so insulting.
I'm sorry you feel lectured, I'm just trying to explain. It's interesting that the staff have been changing categories on Hubs - that's something I've never experienced so it hadn't occurred to me. There is nothing to stop you putting them back where you want them, though.
I know you feel like those Hubs are in a series, but to be fair, most readers probably wouldn't read them as such - they're more likely to be interested in just the stars who are in THEIR star sign. Either that, or they're only interested in the stars they like. So I don't think it's a tragedy that they're separated, if I'm understanding it correctly.
Well, you aren't wrong, but they are splitting them between Paired Life, Exemplore, Holidappy (completely idiotic) and another site or two. A couple getting married should be in Paired Life. I understand it's a business and they are just sticking hubs on niche sites that were bad ideas to start with, and they need hubs to use as filler. So it's confusing to readers. It's true that most people read about their own sign, but they also read about a spouse or lover, or a friend they know well. I changed the ones somebody put in Rich and Famous. My Venus pieces are Astrology fiction,I wrote the circumstances I put them in, but I've given up trying to get that edited. The rules are so poor they should really rewrite them all.
It's not a tragedy, but when people are writing me at home to ask where they can find their sign, it's a bit much. Plus I must have a link at the beginning of these hubs, so people can look up what sign that planet is in for them, or people they care about, and the editors keep putting it at the very bottom of the hub. I change them back, or it makes no sense. Or the reader loses interest if they can't look up people they know. I believe the administration would prefer a reader stay and read the whole hub? I have managed to do that with very long hubs, then the people running the show here take my link that gives my reader the info they need to find more, and puts it on the very bottom of the hub. I don't believe the right hand knows what the left hand is doing, and am very annoyed right now.
I didn't appreciate the way the administration walked back what they told me last night either. I think we can agree two Presidential nominees should be on the same site. They really can't get their act together and nobody is clear on the rules, as I see from what I read on the forums. I'm staying off, it's getting nasty, even when some people have been here long and believe they are helping. I've been here 5 years and the last few answers I got were mean spirited and hurtful. I'm sure people are afraid to ask a question if they have to be lectured about what the administration is doing to their work or made to feel stupid about changes the writer didn't make, the administration did.
I'm sorry I was unclear in my email. We are not retiring the button, we are simply no longer considering requests that are NOT submitted using the button (for example, requests to move Hubs made via email or in the Forums-- our Editors simply can not keep up with these types of requests).
Whew! Thanks for clearing that up, Christy. I thought it was odd.
Frankly I was surprised that HubPages even considered email requests in the first place, I can see how it would get out of hand.
Does that include the one we discussed? My Obama and Trump hubs are on Astrology on Exemplore, and I made the changes asked of me to put the Hillary one there by the Trump one. The Trump one was moved immediately after I published it, and when in edit mode, there was no warning about pixellated images, as I was told. However I did make the changes you asked me to make.
If now we can use the button again, in 60 days the US Presidential Election will be over, and we've already discussed this. I was willing to switch it with a hub I pushed the button on 56 days ago, Venus in Aries Love Lives, if I recall correctly.
I dont put lists, but i do put links to my other hubs.
by summerclark7387 5 years ago
I'm finishing up a Hub I've been working on for like 4-5 days now, and I realize that I could probably separate it into 2 because it has become more in depth than I thought. I'm feeling really good about it, and I think it will be a good article, but I wonder if it is becoming too long. ...
by Gemini Fox 3 years ago
Published a hub on Oklahoma (please don’t get started on how it might be too generic – I had fun doing it). It became the template for my following hubs on Arizona and New Mexico. The Oklahoma one published just fine. The Arizona and New Mexico ones are now Not Featured due to...
by Simone Haruko Smith 6 years ago
Last week, we announced on the HubPages blog that we are giving Hubs a makeover, and that the new Hub layout will be first tested in the Fashion and Beauty category.I am happy to say that the change is now live! Stop by some Fashion and Beauty Hubs to see it live.One thing you'll notice about this...
by Dale Hyde 6 years ago
I posted this in the "Need Help:Ask Here" Topic and it was suggested that I post it here as it seems that others are having the same problem, no matter the tweaking of the tags on our hubs."I have been reading various hubs and tutorials about adjusting tags on our hubs to have them...
by Eugene Brennan 10 months ago
I've had links to my own related hubs snipped on several occasions (mostly blatant lists at the end of a hub), but some links have been left in place after several snips. So is it acceptable to include a link to a hub which may be very relevant to the specific content in a section of a hub, if it...
by Carolee Samuda 3 years ago
So I'm replying to a comment on my hub and upon scrolling through the hub (I always check for errors or how I can improve), I see the related hubs section. There are five hubs there including one of mine. What immediately got my attention is that the other four hubs has "editors choice"...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|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.|