Article Length

1. 81

   dougwest1posted 7 years ago

   I tend to write longer articles for Hubpages (2000 plus words). Would I get more traffic if I wrote two 1000 word or three 700 word articles on related subjects rather than one longer article? Please let me know your experiences and thoughts.

   replyreport
   1. 76

      TIMETRAVELER2posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      It depends on your topic.  If you stuff your articles with wordage that simply is considered "fill" to make them longer,  you'll rank lower.  However, if your articles are longer because what you have to say is important and supports the info you are sharing, then write away.  I have both long and short articles and all do equally well.

      replyreport
2. 60

   paradigmsearchposted 7 years ago

   Just my opinion and experiences. Based on topic, your results may vary.
   
   2000+ words: HP and Google love you.
   
   1000 words: HP and Google like you.
   
   700 words:
   

   replyreport
   1. 72

      Rafa Baxaposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I'm sorry, but what is that thing?

      replyreport
      1. 60

         paradigmsearchposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         .
         https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taser
         
         HP only uses it on those of us who write poetry.
         
         Google uses it whenever they feel like it on everybody.
         
         

         replyreport
3. 87

   Marisa Wrightposted 7 years ago

   Longer Hubs do better - but as TT2 says, they have to be solid information, not filler.  If I couldn't think of at least 800 words to write about a subject, I wouldn't even bother writing the Hub - too short.
   
   For many years, HubPages' told us the "sweet spot" for an article was 1,500 words.  Longer than that, and the average reader's eyes will glaze over, so few people will ever read the rest of the article. 
   
   More recently, that advice has changed, because Google now seems to look kindly on even longer articles, up to 2,500 words. Google is where 90% of our readers come from - so although readers are still unlikely to read the whole the article, the length isn't wasted because it's there to attract Google, which attracts more readers. 
   
   Personally, if your Hub is going to be over 2,000 words, I would split it so you have two well-read Hubs rather than one half-read.  Note, though, that I would never, ever do that literally - there is NO point in splitting it halfway and making it "Part 1' and "Part 2", because series do NOT do well on HubPages. 
   
   Instead, look carefully at the article, identify the different strands and separate them, so you end up with two articles which each focus on a particular aspect of the topic.  This usually yields a better result, because it enables you to create a good, searchable title for each Hub.
   
   If people want to read a biography of Benjamin Franklin, for instance, Wikipedia will always be the first result they find.  Your article won't stand a chance.  Where you can attract a reader is by focussing on one aspect of his life in more detail.  That way, when people type "Benjamin Franklin electricity" into Google and you have a Hub entitled "Benjamin Franklin's electricity discoveries", Google is more likely to pick your Hub instead of Wikipedia, because your Hub's title tells Google it's more relevant.
   
   Of course, you have to have enough material for each one!

   replyreport
4. 81

   dougwest1posted 7 years ago

   Marisa:
   Thanks for the thoughtful reply. Good information.
   Doug

   replyreport
   1. 60

      paradigmsearchposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Marisa is indeed good of heart.

      replyreport
5. 66

   psycheskinnerposted 7 years ago

   Remember these are all guidelines and quality suggestions, not Hubpages rules. Just last week I had a new hub pass QAP at 165 words in length.

   replyreport
   1. 87

      Marisa Wrightposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      You're right, they are not rules.  I'm not aware of any minimum word count in the rules.  The question was whether longer Hubs do better.

      replyreport
   2. 98

      DrMark1961posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Have any articles (that you have published) of that length ever gained any traffic?

      replyreport
      1. 66

         psycheskinnerposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         They do about as well as my long hubs at launch. But I should mention my strategy is to publish hubs as soon as they will pass QAP and add more content later. So the don’t normally stay that short. I just don’t leave anything draft that could be live and earning. And I develop those that start getting hits first.

         replyreport
         1. 98

            DrMark1961posted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Thanks. That sounds like a good strategy.

            replyreport
6. 82

   brianrockposted 7 years ago

   It's also worth noting that longer pages do better at attracting additional long tail keyword searches.
   
   If you wrote 500 to 750 words, you could write a short article tightly focused on a keyword. But it would be very focused. The longer the page is, the more variations you can have on that keyword and the more related topics you can address.
   
   The more queries you rank for, the more traffic you get. So in that sense, longer Hubs may not necessarily rank better on a given query but they're definitely likely to rank for more queries and end up with more views.

   replyreport
7. 81

   dougwest1posted 7 years ago

   DrMark1961:
   I guess you would have to define traffic. Most of my articles are on historical topics and don't get a tremendous amount of traffic. My most popular articles normally get several (10 to 20) views per day. My least popular articles may only get a few views a month. I am sure it would be to my advantage to write on my timely issues. - oh well, I like history.

   replyreport
   1. 87

      Marisa Wrightposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Doug, DrMark was replying to Psycheskinner.  If you switch the forums to Chronological, it's much easier to follow who replied to whom.
      
      As for writing subjects - history can do well, but like i say, there's absolutely no point writing a Hub which competes with Wikipedia. Wikipedia will always win!   The trick is to delve into the detail and cover stuff that Wikipedia doesn't have a detailed page on.

      replyreport
      1. 81

         dougwest1posted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Marisa:
         I have been thinking about your comment on not competing with Wikipedia. I am planning on trying to create a different spin on my future articles to gain more traction on the web.

         replyreport
8. STAFF

   Paul Edmondsonposted 7 years ago

   The data is conclusive, longer articles get more traffic up to about 3000 words.
   
   When we look at the ratio of traffic per word, 1000 - 1500 words is the best ratio.
   
   I think the best opportunity of growing traffic is taking a 1,000 word article that is performing well and figuring out how to add 2,000 words that make it a much more comprehensive document.

   replyreport
   1. 87

      Marisa Wrightposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Thanks, Paul, for confirming what I recalled.  Interesting that the "up to" figure is now 3,000 rather than 2,500. 
      
      What do you think of the strategy suggested by Psycheskinner, i.e.:
      
      If you have an idea for a Hub, write a short version (say, 300 words) and publish it, then go back and flesh it out later?   It's something that has never occurred to me to try.

      replyreport
   2. 76

      TIMETRAVELER2posted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Paul:
      
      Thanks for the info.  That sounds good, but I suspect growing 1000 words to 3000 would be quite difficult.  Perhaps combining articles on similar topics might do the trick, but I still think it would be a daunting task.
      
      I mean, how many ways can you tell people how to empty an RV tank!

      replyreport