I understand there's no reason to submit new articles to niche sites because staff get to those first, but I'm debating whether to go through my old articles to submit them. Is this something anyone here does with success?
I've done it many times, with a low success rate. Unless you know specifically why they were originally rejected, it's difficult. I have a number of rejected articles which I see as essentially similar to hosted ones. Some of them I've worked on a few times and submitted without success. Of course, it sometimes does work out, but it's painful putting in lots of effort and getting knocked back. If you are told that you need to change a, b, and c to get it accepted, that's a different matter.
I understand that it's frustrating when a reason isn't given for rejection. Like you said, it's difficult to know what to change. As you probably already know, you can always post in the forums for advice (and I'd be happy to chime in) or email the team for more general questions about the requirements/preferences of a specific niche site.
I can see the pointers in that. It is like a hint and you get directions. And you arrived without or with a little headache.
I would only suggest submitting older articles if you have made changes to them since they last went through the process. I see this once in a while and I usually accept those that have been updated.
Ahan. I've had mixed success doing that with Reelrundown. Levelskip has been the best for me so far, with almost all of my pieces getting admitted as soon as they are published.
I'll try to make some changes and start submitting olderer articles to Reelrundown once again.
Thank you, Sumantha Cubbison. Lets say I updated three different old articles in a day. A day or two later, I noted them featured. Can these three different articles be submit to niche sites one after the other the same day? Thanks again.
It took a couple of years, but I rewrote and submitted all of my old articles to the niche sites. When I took a hard look at my old articles, I could immediately see why they were initially rejected and rewrote them accordingly. It was a lot of time and effort but very worth it. I am reaping the financial rewards now.
That's encouraging. I'll have to take a look at my old articles, see what I can do.
Slightly different topic, but my old number one article had gone from 600 views a day down to 190 daily views, while sitting on the niche site (Pethelpful). I went back and re optimized for my original topic. People were using new longtail keyword searches, and an editor had removed the main word I had optimized the article for.
Also I have found adding bulleted lists helps improve ranking and pageviews. It improves your chances of being one of the answers to the Google questions (I don't know the tech term for the list of questions Google offers up responses to)
It took about 2 months for Google to appreciate my efforts. Now it is back to being my number one article with 900-1200 pageviews a day, depending on the day of the week. As Old Roses notes, there is value in reworking an old article.
Have you found that you can reoptimize articles that never have done that well and still expect a good response? I have edited some of my poorly performing articles numerous times and never see much change. Do you think it matters where in the article the list is placed? (First capsule, or can it be further down?)
For instance in this article https://pethelpful.com/dogs/Fireworks-a … g-Your-Dog I present what I consider the best method first, but then include all of the other alternative training methods that I am aware of.
What edits have you tried? Have you researched frequently-searched titles?
Google is more likely to pick up a bulleted list if it's near the top of the article. Also make it a bulleted list rather than a series of longer paragraphs with bullets. I usually start the article with a summary in bullet points, then if I want to give a longer explanation for each one, then I'll do that later in the article.
Here's the bulleted list that Google picks up for dogs and fireworks:
https://www.rspca.org.uk/adviceandwelfa … fireworks.
Note how succinct it is.
You don't have a video in that Hub - it's always worth seeking one out and adding it. If you can add some words to encourage readers to watch it, even better. Watching a video keeps your reader on the page longer, which is a good thing.
By the way, I notice the RSPCA site has a nice infographic which you're allowed to use. I suggest putting it at the end of the Hub, assuming you agree with their advice. Don't use the code - just post it as an image and give them a link. They're a good neighbourhood to link to.
Thanks for your help. I did not think that RSPCA infographic was appropriate for my article but I did put the bullet list first instead of further down the page and I also added a dog music video from Youtube.
I am not sure how popular this might be (not sure it is searched a lot) but maybe these changes will be beneficial.
I think, as long as the title of the capsule asks or states the answer to a Google frequently asked question, the bulleted list can be the last capsule on the page.
Other "lists" can be created by google, by bolding the first word in a paragraph: Thundershirts ( in bold then more about thundershirts in the rest of the paragraph), Loud Classical Music (in Bold and more about how that drowns out noise), Pheromones (in bold etc)... Google will ferret out the list from the bold words, which is useful if you don't want to rewrite your article entirely, and if that suits your original article better.
I have had 50% success with reworking old articles this way. Some still malinger, while others have taken off after years and years of 30 views a day. One of those is now 450 views a day. I am assuming the age of the article + updating the content into a format google finds easy to parse helped it jump in page views.
Reworking an article that was once #1-3 in Serps, but fell off a cliff, is the most successful, in my experience. And you have to be patient before you know if it worked, 2-3 months should tell you if your changes had any effect.
Thanks for all of that info. I went ahead and put that bullet list up higher, added a MFP image, deleted an Amazon link, and added a video to see if it improves at all, but am not real hopeful since it was already on the first page and still gets horrible traffic. It never was the top of the SERPs as you mentioned with your other article.
One problem is that fireworks is pretty much seasonal in the USA. This is an issue for us just around New Years and the Fourth of July.
You could add thunder, which causes similar symptoms of noise induced shaking, drooling etc.. That would be more of a year round search term.
Longtail keywords searches are the same for Dog Scared of "Thunder" "Fireworks" Shaking.
Dog "Storm" "Fireworks" Anxiety
And maybe a capsule on what happens to your dog physiologically when it gets into this fear response.
Okay, wow, good to know. Definitely going to go through my articles, see what I can do.
I used to do it, but now I have already had almost all of my articles moved. I feel like I have a pretty good idea what the niche sites are looking for, and I don't feel that any of the few I have remaining on HP would be accepted.
I tried a couple of them that I had doubts about, and sure enough, they were rejected, so I no longer bother submitting them unless I have recently made major edits.
I have had a better time writing new content instead of fixing old content. Right now all my hubs are on niche websites. But this is because I only move onto new hubs once they are accepted.
I had a few issues with some older hubs and I eventually moved on or got rid of them. I also tested some new hub ideas and they did not work out as I wanted. Got rid of those as well.
I think some of your hubs could be moved. I would take a look at what hubs are doing OK now and see if you can move those ones.
It was a coincidence that I just post a aptly related topic moments ago. Minds are universal?
My experience is that 90 percent of articles written pre-niche sites are moved onto platforms such as Owlcation and Soapboxie after I submit them. It might be that those niches are where most of my work goes and I have developed a good rapport with the editors there. It's when I stray outside those two niches that I get rejections.
Okay, good to know. Sounds like from responses here that it can be difficult with a lot of the niche sites to get articles accepted. I'll have to see what kind of edits I can do, looks like, if I'm expecting to successfully getting any articles moved.
Edit: Although it's interesting I think I have some old articles that could qualify for those niche sites you mentioned that accepted your articles.
Hi Rupert, you have said it well. Well, I can inferred that you may by now knew some requirement of these two niche sites? Seriously, can you tell us a thing or two? Even more? Thanks.
When I started this new account, only about half of my Hubs were moved initially, so I had to manually submit the rest. I simply expanded them a bit. Most got accepted. For the couple that were rejected, I received the usual generic email BUT it had some very specific advice in the last paragraph, which I will follow when I get around to resubmitting!
I have a handful of others which I didn't submit because I don't think they'd be accepted.
Every so often I go thru my old articles that are still moldering away on HubPages and do some updating/tweaking so that they'll (hopefully) get beamed up to a niche site. It's been a slow process but the pile is getting smaller, I'm starting to see the light at the end of the tunnel.
...of course, not every one of them does make the journey to a niche, even if I update them, and I've found others that are just too outdated to be of any use, so I've unpublished a fair share of those oldies and put them out of their misery.
I stopped trying to get my articles to a niche site about a year ago or so. I was suppose to have an article in the que on Pethelpful, but it has been two years and I highly doubt anything is going to come of it despite being told several times it was going to be moved.
Most of the ones I have left to move need to be majorly reworked and I'm honestly not interested in putting in the work at this time. Especially when all we get is a generic rejection letter. I've reworked several of those articles with no luck so I have given up. I will eventually delete them all and just submit new articles, as those seem to move over better.
I have never received just a generic rejection letter. Yes, there is always the standard wording - but the last paragraph usually has specific pointers to improve, and if you can fix those, you can resubmit and there's a good chance it will be accepted.
If there is nothing specific in the last paragraph then the scope of improvements needed was too great.
I have not found that to be true. The last paragraph was the same for all the generic e-mails. "You are welcome to rework this article and submit it for re-review in 60 days, but please keep in mind that the topical issues above can be difficult to fix. Your effort may be better spent publishing a new article, or submitting a different one for Owlcation after the 14-day wait period."
The only time I got something specific was if the editor actually emailed me which was few and far between. Not to mention half the time the bullet points of the email did not apply to my article.
I eventually was able to get some of the articles moved. Some I only did one edit, and others I had to do several rewrites so I'm not sure what exactly needed to be changed (since they all needed different degrees of edits), but some of them where finally accepted. It would have been a lot easier if I would have known exactly what they where looking for considering some of them I didn't change much and they were accepted the second time around.
Come to think of it I remember an article they emailed me about saying it could be moved to a niche site if I did x, y, and z. I did what I could and I haven't heard back in years. Maybe I'll try again, but I'm with you, if something's more trouble than it's worth I start thinking of easier alternatives.
What's very funny about that particular article is the editor wanted me to make it more about my personal experience on the subject matter and that article was nothing but my personal experience on that matter. It's something I have decades of experience with. C'est la vie.
That may well be, but I'd say they were asking you to make that clearer in the way you phrased it. If you just stated the facts without relating it to examples from your own experience, then it could just as easily sound like you read it in a textbook.
The email is somewhat misleading. They don't keep an eye on the Hub, so that when you do x, y and z, they'll move it. You need to do x, y and z and then submit it again.
I did mention that if there isn't a specific last paragraph, that means there are too many issues that need addressing (in their opinion). You'll only get that final paragraph - or a separate email - if there are just a few, clearly defined, issues that can be quickly explained.
Worth bearing in mind that if you're submitting an article that's already been on the old site for a long time and hasn't done well, the company isn't going to invest staff time and money to help you fix it. They have a long queue of new articles constantly arriving and that's their priority.
I have not found that to be the case though. I did mention I had articles with all different degrees of edits needed, denied with that same generic e-mail. I have been able to get several moved after only a few tweaks on multiple occasions (this was many years ago though). I think it really depended on who happened across the article in the que honestly. All the articles I submitted were on HP for a long time as I've been here for many years prior to the niche sites, but they were ones that saw traffic. I wasn't trying to put zero traffic articles on the niche sites.
If I'm only updating photo's or taking out a few choice words (both examples I've done in the past with the generic reject e-mail), there is no reason to not explain that. It would have saved me and the editors more time in the long run. Maybe I'm in the minority, but I have never had much luck transfering articles, or talking with editors.
I did this a few years ago - but the ones I have remaining I have just given up on - I have submitted a couple and got enough feedback to know the problem, but I just don't think it's worth the effort I would need to make to get up to scratch.
I think it's worth considering how much potential they have to get traffic if moved. For example there was one I updated and got accepted to a niche site but topic is something that hardly anyone ever googles so not really worth it.
Can you tell us why? The thread has been of much interest to me, and is educating. Thanks.
One that I'm considering not submitting to a niche site is an opinion piece which notoriously do badly in terms of traffic and are more or less frowned upon. It's unfortunate in many ways, but it's a fact.
My sense is that opinion pieces do well on Medium.com If it is evergreen, you might experiment over there.
by Tim Mitchell 3 years ago
I recived a note from HubPages an article is eligible for a niche site. The notes at the bottom stated to check grammar. I have done corrections using grammarly and one other editing software. The question is do I wait for them to review or do I go through the process of submitting to a niche site?
by Dina Sostarec 2 weeks 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 Caren White 2 years 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 Ray 2 years ago
Should I submit the article with the highest hubscore for a higher chance of approval?
by Meagan Ireland 3 weeks ago
Almost all of the articles I had on niche sites now say "view on hubpages". Are they getting rid of the niche sites or just removing a bunch of articles?
by Scott S Bateman 23 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 © 2020 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.|