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 moving to the network sites, however I'm a bit concerned about the quality of editing that has or has not happened on a few of my articles.
I just had an article selected earlier this week that I wrote 6 years ago and had not gotten around to editing yet that was selected for Dengarden. It doesn't receive much traffic, less than 10 views a month so it's not an article that is performing well and would have caused them to pick it. With those two things in mind I'm very surprised it was selected, when I am having trouble getting well written articles that receive consistant traffic to get approved. I also thought it might be an article that was partly related to YMYL which I thought needed to be exceptional to get accepted and must contain a bio (which this particular one does not, and one was not added for me which is something that has happened more than once in the past).
I went in to check out the article thinking it was better than I had remembered and it most definitely was not ( I was actually embarassed by the quality, and could not believe how bad some sections really were). The titles were not consistent style wise (some had a colon and others did not), although all the capitalization was consistent and correct. There were a lot of spelling/grammar errors and sentences that plain did not make any sense at all that I have since corrected which took me almost 2 hours. I did more than just edit spelling/grammar, I added two sections as well but it was necessary to update the article to make it of better quality.
I'm still wondering how the spelling/grammar errors were not caught in the editing process by editors? Some of the mistakes I found were glaring and very obvious as soon as I opened the article and started skimming. I know mistakes happen, but this is the third time I've had a subpar article selected by hp and I've had to drop what I was working on to fix an article that I wasn't planning to work on for a few weeks. Once they get moved to a niche site though I feel that I need to bring them up to a higher standard, which is what I thought they needed to be before they ever got moved.
Is there a way to contact hp editors or staff in general besides the editors@hp and team@hp options? I've sent several e-mails to those addresses and do not always get a reply back. I'm getting very frustrated with what is and is not getting moved and would really like some clarity, because right now there does not seem to be a set standard of quality at least in regards to my articles. It's also frustrating to start working on something and then being forced to stop in the middle of it to work on something else. Those articles that are moved take precedence because they are actually on a niche site now.
It's great they are moving them, but I can understand your annoyance that you didn't have time to fix them up. I have the opposite problem, I am fixing up the remaining hubs on HP, little by little, and hoping they will notice and move some of them. I have around 30 left, but at least half of them are up to speed. They are all featured and have scores in the 90's, with a few 80's.
I don't know any other address to get in touch with the administration besides what you already have.
I also wonder about these 12 new editors. We had to welcome them all, and they seem to be moving like snails, if they are moving at all. Even when I submit the measly two hubs we are allowed monthly to a niche site, it sometimes takes more than 2 weeks, and so it doesn't work out that I can get two moved in a month.
I would think they would want to get all that out of the way so we can move forward. I am so sick of some of my own work, even though it's evergreen, and doesn't go out of season or fashion. I read it over and I know it still has good bones and is relevant. It takes time to keep updating and there's not time to write new material, so it's a lose/lose from my view.
I would like to hear from the administration on this. It doesn't look good for the site if readers see how old some of this material is, even if it is still evergreen. Let's move on already.
It definitely has really slowed down. I had an article that I updated several times and even submitted three times before it was finally accepted. It was so time consuming, but it was one of my last top performing articles and I wanted it moved. I also did not expect it to take so long, because it is well written, has a score in the high 90's, and gets a steady flow of traffic. But they never picked it up on their own and denied it the first three times for reasons I could not figure out. The other one's I have updated with hopes of being selected have not been picked up either, so I'll eventually have to submit them. Yet the article I submitted a few days ago was accepted and moved within a day. So I don't know what is going on.
I also received an e-mail saying they looked at an article on one of the niche sites I can't remember which one, but it had passed their quality test. I thought they only did that for articles you edit, but I had not edited that one at all recently so I'm not sure why they were looking at it when there are so many articles waiting to be proccessed and moved.
I have another article that has been sitting in the editor's que for going on 4 months now and am finally in contact with an editor about getting it moved by the end of next week. Things really seem to be going so slow on some niche sites. Definitely makes it very difficult to write new content. I have so many ideas I want to get articles written about, but I've been gone from hp for so long I have quite a few articles that still need to be updated and moved to the niche sites.
I agree it can be a lose/lose situation at times. I'm currently trying to work on 3 different articles at the same time, and it's hard to get work done when I have to constantly share my time between so many different projects.
I'm sure we aren't the only two having this issue.
As far as hubs already on niche sites, they change the rules quite often. So I have also been asked to make a change or two on some articles already on niches. That's why it would behoove them to just get all the older hubs they will accept on niches, so that's done and we can spend our time writing.
When the niches first began, they snapped up about one third of all my hubs. So none of them had been through the APA capitalization changes, they were suggesting we should put titles in capsules, (which was later reversed), we had to change the sizes of all the pictures to be full width (if you really can't, they moved them to the middle of the text). Now they want hyperlinks to products on Amazon instead of Amazon capsules, although all I can figure out to do to recommend the product is to discuss it in the text of my hub, which I don't like. I don't use them a lot.
I feel like its worth it, because I make money on articles I wrote years ago. But its hard to keep going back to old work and get in the mood for new work.
I guess we have to hang in there, but don't be afraid to contact them, they are usually nice if you do get an answer.
I think it behooves them to slow down. I realize that the sites need fresh content, which is why they accept the older articles, but those with better traffic were already moved over earlier. The others, like the OP pointed out, are our older articles or those with mistakes.
Google does not recognize you as an individual writer, just a part of those niche sites you write for. If the older articles are accepted, warts and all, it makes all of the other articles less perfect. Remember all the things that used to be published here pre-Panda?
Yes, I do. I just have a group I'd like to get moving which are all fixed up now. But I suppose it's best to fix them all, the administration doesn't have time to comb through them. Some of them have been kicking around for ages. I'd like to move forward, and sometimes consider deleting some. But when I read them, they are too good to delete, or easy to improve. Decisions, decisions.
Did you feel like you were in a time machine looking at yourself 6 years ago? It happens.
From time to time some freak of nature happens and I have a 3 year old blog post take off for a day or two. It's a great excuse to check it out and tweak and update. Nothing like dusting off and to freshen up an old favorite.
I've been slowly updating and fixing old articles. The ones that were selected get very minimal traffic. They've been sitting at 0 I'm assuming for many years. I've been focusing on one's that see a few views here and there. I have so many articles that need my attention since I took a long break from writing shortly after I joined here. It is nice when an older article takes off for a day or two. Helps me to know which articles have the potential to do well with some updating and proofreading.
I was in a very interesting place in my life 6yrs ago so it's definitely been weird looking back at some of the articles I wrote back then.
I wish that more of my older articles would be reviewed, especially the ones I have already upgraded. The thing that puzzles me a bit is the notices that I get that say something like "Your Article on (niche site) has been reviewed and 'Congratulations' it meets our quality standards.. etc. "These are on some of my highest rated, highest traffic hubs.
Agreed on all points listed above. It seems like there are no consistent guidelines/standards and some of the article I have had moved automatically are definitely of lower quality or just aren't in a format I think will get the most attention compared to some that I can't get moved. On at least two occasions despite not receiving an email, I fixed up an article and went to submit it only to find that when I did so there was already a note from the editor asking me to fix something specific so it could be moved - in both cases they were simple and relatively small fixes having more to do with format than content which I could have completed months before had I known about them. Once I quickly fixed them and submitted them to the suggested site neither were moved and both are still pending months later. It is difficult to keep up with ideas I have for future articles, articles I'm writing, updating articles, submitting articles to niche sites, responding to comments, replying to questions along with reading and commenting on other HP articles and keeping up with the forums and developments with Maven. Articles that have been edited more than once before with inconsistent edits, are now being re-edited and having things altered the first time and reversed the second time, reversed yet again the third time now being edited to go back to my original text. It gets silly after a while. I'm also receiving pro edits on already edited articles also reversing previous edits. It doesn't much matter to me as long as they don't change the meaning of what I've written and I don't have to do the edits - I get annoyed when asked to edit a certain way then asked again a few months later to re-edit it in a different way the a third time to re-edit so some of it goes back to the first edit and some to the original text with yet more new edits requested which don't jive with my content.
All this being said (just venting, sorry) - As an editor I know that sometimes you think you've caught everything but when an edited text is returned sometimes because of the new writing and sometimes because you did miss it the first time you need to request other changes. It's not ideal but then again none of us are perfect and being flexible is one of the greatest qualities we can have. Though as I'm getting older I am finding that I am less and less flexible - not good!
by Caren White 10 months ago
I was under the impression that we could only submit one hub every two weeks for niche sites. I submitted a hub and an editor replied with changes that I needed to make before it could be moved. As I'm making those changes, I have received two emails that another two of my hubs are...
by Scott S Bateman 7 weeks 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...
by Cholee Clay 9 months ago
I have an article that an editor has made substantial changes too. Including adding a bio that they wrote themselves. I have not seen an edit this bad in quite some time on one of my articles, and I do not want to go through the whole article and rewrite half of it. I've already spent countless...
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 Michael Kismet 20 months ago
I already have a number of hubs moved to the Hubpages network sites, but haven't really seen a drastic traffic change in said hubs. So, is it worth the risk to submit one of my hubs that already receives a decent amount of daily views to a vertical site?I'd hate to see aforementioned hub drop in...
by Dr Mark 12 months ago
Over 1/4 of my hubs have not been moved to a niche site. They do not have much traffic from Google, so it is not HPs fault that they have not been selected. There is nothing wrong with them, but they do not have "Google love" so are only moved in the slow process where I ask HP to move...
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.|