I'd like feedback on my article: 25 Years Ago WIRED Predicted the Futu

1. 86

   TimArendsposted 2 years ago

   To reply to the most obvious comments:
   
   1. Yes, I know it's long, but it's necessarily so, because it's reviewing and analyzing an entire book.
   
   2. No, I don't think it could be broken into separate hubs, although many of the points in this hub could be expanded into separate hubs.
   
   https://discover.hubpages.com/technolog … -were-they

   replyreport
   1. 87

      quotationsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I think the article needs to be broken up and reformatted.
      
      I realize why it is so long, but you could have the future predictions in a completely different article and discuss how likely they are based on their time horizon.
      
      You could also avoid dealing with all of their predictions and focus just on the top ten. In that case you could have one article about the wacky predictions that did not come true and then another one that did come true.
      
      Whichever way you approach it, I think you need to improve the images. There is a certain sameness to the images you have chosen, especially in their color palette which prevents them from standing out and breaking this incredibly long article up.
      
      You should also add some youtube videos and maybe some call out boxes, anything to let the eye skim and find interesting points. Otherwise people will give up on reading it.

      replyreport
   2. 94

      OldRosesposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      When you are writing a hub, bear in mind that most people read internet articles on their phones, so the longer the article, the less likely they are to finish reading it. 
      
      There is lots of research on the ideal length of internet articles.  The guidelines that HubPages provides are a result of that research.  Stick to the guidelines for best results.

      replyreport
2. 86

   TimArendsposted 2 years ago

   Yeah, you're right. I checked out the published article on my older phone and it's downright sluggish! In my word processor the article came out to 36 printed pages! On the plus side, perhaps it's greater length gives more content for the search engines to lock onto. It's broken up into short sections so that people can read whatever they're interested in without having to read the whole thing.

   replyreport
3. 91

   Stephen Tomkinsonposted 2 years ago

   Hi Tim. An entertaining piece and I see why you did it in one chunk. You had enough material here to write a series of posts. This would have allowed you to go into each in greater detail, without tiring the reader.
   One other (small) thing, you go into some detail about the original layout. Perhaps you could have scanned an entry and saved yourself some work.
   I enjoyed your article, Thanks.
   P:S. I seem to remember reading the book years ago. Don't know what happened to it.

   replyreport