Article Ratings

1. 63

   Abby Slutskyposted 4 years ago

   Hi,
   I am not asking anyone for their specific article ratings, but I want to get an idea of whether my articles are being rated as high as I want them to be. Can some of you more experienced hubbers give me an idea of what you consider a strong article rating? I think I am doing fine, but I am still uncertain. I would love to know what some of you consider a strong rating. Thanks for your input. I appreciate all your time.
   Abby

   replyreport
   1. 87

      NateB11posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      I think the 90s are awesome, the 80s is still good and 70s isn't bad. The 60s are tolerable, not fond of the 50s but I only have one in the 50s and it's fairly new.

      replyreport
      1. 63

         Abby Slutskyposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Thank you. I think I'm doing alright, but of course, there is always room for improvement. Thank you.

         replyreport
   2. 65

      OldRosesposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      I'm seem to be an under-achiever.  My articles all score in the 70s and 80s with an average of 83.  I don't worry about my article scores, just my traffic which increases each year.

      replyreport
2. 81

   theraggededgeposted 4 years ago

   I think a strong rating is 100 Most of mine are in the 90s with two at 100. Though there's a bunch that are lower, bringing my overall score to 89. It varies daily, sometimes I have lots at 100, sometimes none.
   
   It's not terribly important unless there are too many languishing below 80.

   replyreport
   1. 86

      Miebakagh57posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Where is Rupert Taylor, who had HP math explaining of the rating?   Some of my articles fall within 60-72, the others around 50.

      replyreport
      1. 81

         theraggededgeposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         He's busy gardening. He has a lot to do before harvesting his winter rutabagas.

         replyreport
         1. 87

            NateB11posted 4 years agoin reply to this

            

            replyreport
         2. 86

            Miebakagh57posted 4 years agoin reply to this

            Good old Rupert, bless his soul! Gardening to gather rutabagas? The man good at practicing his prizely preach.   Soulishly, a taste of Rupert's harvest is what my soul now goes for, instead of abstract math rating that is used to nose diving to crash my articles!                 Seriously, the day a  Nepoleon will rise and work 24 hours, that day will crush the rating. Not to worry is the rule.

            replyreport
            1. 67

               lobobrandonposted 4 years agoin reply to this

               Insert thinking emoji.

               replyreport
               1. 81

                  theraggededgeposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  Add a flummoxed emoji for me.

                  replyreport
                  1. 86

                     Miebakagh57posted 4 years agoin reply to this

                     A plate of fluffy rutabaga for me, joking aside.

                     replyreport
                  2. 67

                     lobobrandonposted 4 years agoin reply to this

                     Haha

                     replyreport
               2. 86

                  Miebakagh57posted 4 years agoin reply to this

                  A photo of rutabagas would be best. I hardly use emoji due to lack of identifying and understanding!

                  replyreport
   2. 100

      DrMark1961posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Even my article that has had great traffic everyday for 6 years, and has been Hubpro edited twice, still only has a score of 99. 100 is impressive since it looks like you are doing a better job at this than the editors!

      replyreport
      1. 81

         theraggededgeposted 4 years agoin reply to this

         The two that are currently at 100 are not my best ones. It changes all the time. I have one that often reaches 100 and it barely gets any traffic. Sometimes I have 7 at 100, other times, none.
         
         I don't think it matters, tbh.

         replyreport
      2. 87

         NateB11posted 4 years agoin reply to this

         My experience is that high scored articles often have low traffic and lower scored ones often get a lot of traffic. As per usual, the reason for these scores remains a mystery.

         replyreport
         1. 63

            Abby Slutskyposted 4 years agoin reply to this

            Thank you.

            replyreport
            1. 87

               NateB11posted 4 years agoin reply to this

               Actually, sorry, I just took a look at my articles and many of the high score  articles also have high traffic. I think I was thinking of a time years ago when the opposite was the case. At any rate, the traffic seems to reflect the score.

               replyreport
3. 67

   lobobrandonposted 4 years ago

   My average is 87, most are in the 90s with one at 70, the next lowest is 82. The one at 70 is on a niche site, but it never did well and it would make no difference if I deleted it.

   replyreport
   1. 63

      Abby Slutskyposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Thank you. I am within range.

      replyreport
4. 76

   Rupert Taylorposted 4 years ago

   New information coming into Hubscore Central allows for refining how the number is calculated. It starts with your shoe size multiplied by the last two digits of your social insurance number. This is where the arithmetic gets a bit strange; you subtract the time, in seconds, that it takes a dung beetle to kick in the bumps on a dill pickle. Finally, and this is new, the circumference of a rutabaga, in centimetres, is added. Rutabagas change size as they grow so this accounts for changes in Hubscores.

   replyreport
   1. 81

      theraggededgeposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      We can always rely on you, Rupert, to come up with an accurate explanation.
      
      

      replyreport
   2. 87

      NateB11posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Mystery solved!

      replyreport
   3. 100

      DrMark1961posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      I KNEW rutabagas had something to do with all of this. Thank you for clearing this up for those of us with less knowledge of their inner workings.

      replyreport
   4. 67

      lobobrandonposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Also explains the seasonal drops. No rutabagas in winter.

      replyreport
      1. 86

         Miebakagh57posted 4 years agoin reply to this

         Repeat, that's nose diving!

         replyreport
   5. 86

      Miebakagh57posted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Can we find such a man possessed with the spirit of the god of math?!

      replyreport
5. 61

   FatFreddysCatposted 4 years ago

   Haters gonna hate, rutabagas gonna rutabate!
   
   ...anyway, on topic: last I checked, the majority of my active/featured articles have scores that lie somewhere in the high 70s to mid '80s range. A handful of them are up in the 90s, which surprises me as much as anyone.

   replyreport
   1. 63

      Abby Slutskyposted 4 years agoin reply to this

      Although it was not my intent to cause everyone to share their ratings, most of mine are between mid-seventies and mid-eighties. I don't have any above that yet, but I have only been here about 11 or 12 weeks.

      replyreport