My hub was published after only 3 hours

1. 92

   paolaenergyaposted 4 months ago

   This is odd but I'm not complaining. My latest hub got processed in 3 hours instead of 48 hours and got published/featured on HP today. I think it's a personal best. Has it happened to you and how long did it take?

   replyreport
2. 94

   PaulGoodman67posted 4 months ago

   I thought that the timing of getting onto the niches depended to some extent on the availability of (human) editors.
   
   However, I always thought that just getting published was a more automated process and so the timing was pretty consistent.

   replyreport
3. 92

   paolaenergyaposted 4 months ago

   Hi Paul, not sure I explained myself correctly, I meant that my latest hub got onto Hubpages, not a niche site, in 3 hours instead of 48 hours. My previous hub took the whole 48 hours to get published on Hubpages. I also thought the process was automatic but there must be some facts that hold back some hubs compared to others. It could be to do with word count as the 3 hour hub was shorter than others.
   
   How long does it take for you?
   
   With regards to niche sites, last time I had a hub that was manually edited it took about 8 days to get to a network site but  recently one I submitted to the editors weeks ago is still in limbo so who knows?

   replyreport
   1. 94

      PaulGoodman67posted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Yes, I understood you and I thought my answer reflected that.
      
      As a process that I believe is largely or wholly automated, I wouldn't expect much variation in timing but maybe I'm wrong.
      
      The assessment for niches is manual, as far as I can make out, and so the timing can vary a lot.
      
      24 hours is my average to just get published and it's pretty consistent, though I'm not sure why it matters.
      
      It may be quicker for you because less people are submitting nowadays, I don't know. It's always been "up to 48 hours" but usually it's faster than that.
      
      I don't personally see getting onto hp.com or Discovery as important, except as a stepping stone to the niches. It's like an administrative hurdle.
      
      The publishing stage is there to weed out the worst rule-breakers.

      replyreport
   2. 92

      WriterJanisposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      I know there can be different waiting times for the niche sites depending on how busy the editors are. Some have happened to me quickly, then I have one from last July that I'm still waiting on.

      replyreport
      1. 92

         paolaenergyaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

         Wow, last July? It may be worth emailing the team to get a progress report. Good luck!

         replyreport
         1. 92

            WriterJanisposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            Thanks. I've heard it's best not to email editors as they are already so busy and this isn't the only article I've been waiting on for months.

            replyreport
   3. STAFF

      Matt Wellsposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Remember that the Quality Assessment Process starts over if you edit your article while it is going through the QAP. I'm not saying this is what happened when your last article took 48 hours, but it may have been the reason, and it's just good to know.

      replyreport
4. 92

   paolaenergyaposted 4 months ago

   Thanks for your insights Paul.

   replyreport
5. 69

   Miebakagh57posted 4 months ago

   Many of us writers here have come near sure a trend. But we had not took notice of the time frame.                                    An article passing the QAP is not automated. It's read by an editor.                                That said, many writers like me here are not publishing weekly again. That means less stories waiting before an editor. And so agreeing with PaulGoodMan67, the 48 hours time is being reduced.                                 How long it took a read to land on a niche site can have similar time frame, on first publication.

   replyreport
6. 92

   paolaenergyaposted 4 months ago

   I keep an eye on when a hub goes live so I can share it on social media. I made the mistake of sharing a popular hub while it was still in Discovery where it gained a lot of traffic, only to dip when it got published on Hubpages. I still don't know how much the QAP is automated and how much is manual but I guess it's a mix of both?

   replyreport
   1. 97

      theraggededgeposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      The other way around? They start off on HP where they cannot earn, then go to Discovery where they may earn with enough views. If good enough, they then get moved to one of the network sites.

      replyreport
      1. 92

         paolaenergyaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

         My bad, to correct what I said earlier it was the other way round aka when my hub got moved to Discovery it no longer had traction from social media.

         replyreport
         1. 97

            theraggededgeposted 4 months agoin reply to this

            I think it's fine when it goes from Discovery onward. There's a redirect. But hp.com is basically a dump. If articles stay there (and I have a few) they are doing nothing.
            
            I should sort them out But I can't be arsed, as we say in the UK

            replyreport
            1. 94

               PaulGoodman67posted 4 months agoin reply to this

               Yeah, hp.com is Hell, Discovery is Purgatory, niches are Heaven (or at least they used to be!)
               
               It's niches or nothing for me. My experience of Discovery is that normally traffic is so low, any earnings are measly. I try to get stuff promoted but sometimes you have to throw in the towel.

               replyreport
            2. 92

               paolaenergyaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

               I know the feeling! Then again, one of the key criteria for keeping hubs in niche sites according to the guidelines is that they are evergreen and in my case a few either never "graduated" beyond HP or got demoted from niche sites.

               replyreport
7. 92

   paolaenergyaposted 4 months ago

   Paul you have a really good track record with the niche sites, well done! I had a few hubs being demoted from the niches due to low traffic. Oh well.

   replyreport
   1. 94

      PaulGoodman67posted 4 months agoin reply to this

      I may be wrong but given how many published hubs there are in the niches, I think the editors have focused on improving the best stuff and demoting the articles least popular with search engines. The stuff in between has largely been left alone.
      
      I’ve certainly had hubs demoted. I try not to take it personally as low traffic can be caused by a variety of things, it’s not always a quality issue.

      replyreport
      1. 92

         paolaenergyaposted 4 months agoin reply to this

         Yes, I agree. I also think the focus is on evergreen content and I must admit some of my hubs don't pass that test anymore... It's all good, this year I have been doing more work researching evergreen topics.

         replyreport
         1. 94

            PaulGoodman67posted 4 months agoin reply to this

            The problem with evergreen is that eventually the market gets saturated.
            
            It was way easier ten years ago to find topics that hadn't been covered extensively.
            
            That's more the problem for me. The competition levels are huge now and it only gets worse.
            
            It feels like a decline is inevitable on that front.
            
            We're completely reliant on HP finding ways to boost our work in the search engine rankings, as what worked a few years ago, now gets outcompeted.
            
            We can maintain and improve hubs but there are limitations.

            replyreport
8. 92

   paolaenergyaposted 4 months ago

   Thank you Matt for taking the time to reply. I'll experiment with my next hub, downing tools after I hit 'publish' and see how long it takes. Does word count matter with processing time, i.e., do shorter hubs take less time to go through the  QAP?

   replyreport
   1. STAFF

      Matt Wellsposted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Word count does not affect processing time.

      replyreport
9. 87

   Jan Saintsposted 4 months ago

   That should be Discover, not Discovery, by the way.

   replyreport
   1. 94

      PaulGoodman67posted 4 months agoin reply to this

      Yes, it’s a mistake I often make!

      replyreport
10. 83

    Venkatachari Mposted 4 months ago

    Glad to hear this. It happened to me some years back. It took less than 4 hours, but not beyond that period.

    replyreport
11. 92

    paolaenergyaposted 4 months ago

    Thanks Matt. Keep up the good work!

    replyreport
12. 69

    Miebakagh57posted 4 months ago

    The buttomline is that the 24, 48, plus hours are stipulated suggestions.                                       And anything can happen, like when you 'publish' an article, it immediately lands on an editors desk. And he or she goes to work the stuff.

    replyreport
13. 69

    Miebakagh57posted 4 months ago

    It's worth the editors effort to informed a writer the problem with a story, instead of letting the piece to linger in limbo.

    replyreport