Do You Have Orphanated Hubs?

1. 60

   paradigmsearchposted 11 years ago

   I always forget to do that.
   
   http://hubpages.com/my/hubs/groups

   replyreport
   1. 62

      Lisa HWposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      OMG.  Thanks for posting this.  Yes, I do seem to have - like - a million of them!!  (Well, not a million, obviously.  )
      
      I went to the link and was scrolling down and scrolling down, "knowing" I don't usually forget to put them in a group - and feeling pretty good.  Then I hit - like - a foot-long string of orphans.      Again, thanks (not that you posted for me, specifically, of course....      )
      
      
      (I just went back for a quick estimate.  I'm thinking there are between 130 and 140 orphans!!  I probably shouldn't admit that in public, eh?  Oopsie!  )

      replyreport
2. 61

   lyndreposted 11 years ago

   If anyone has any good orphanated hubs I am willing to adopt.
   
   

   replyreport
3. 65

   Daniel Carterposted 11 years ago

   I'm only half orphanated at present.
   

   replyreport
4. 78

   Uninvited Writerposted 11 years ago

   I go through mine once in a while and put them in groups

   replyreport
   1. 79

      Sally's Troveposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I set up groups a long time ago and always assign a new Hub to one of them. Now and again, a new group is needed, so I make a new one.
      
      I have no idea if people other than Hubbers ever look at those "group" links at the end of a Hub...there's so much more happening on a Hub page to take a reader elsewhere.

      replyreport
5. 81

   Mark Ewbieposted 11 years ago

   I think groups are very important.  If someone has Googled your page they might just want to visit a related page of yours. 
   
   For too long I've put mine in broad groups - Writing, Humour and so on - but I think having many, more targeted groups, is a better way to go.
   
   Especially since they don't buy or click on anything - at least there's a chance of getting another HP impression.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Baileybearposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      should only 3 be in a group?  Or do they rotate around?

      replyreport
      1. 85

         Aficionadaposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Baileybear, you can organize them however you wish.  But, no, they don't rotate.  It's not like an RSS feed.  It's a fixed group that provides links from one to another to another at the bottom of each Hub that is in the group.  When you edit the groups, you can set the sequence in such a way that there is a more-or-less logical flow between articles.
         
         I try to think of what would interest someone who is reading a specific article of mine, and then I group my Hubs together based on that.  Some of my groups have a dozen or so Hubs in them, and I try not to go beyond that.  (Even that number may be too high.)
         
         I get kind of weirdly "creative" to come up with a grouping that will fit all of the otherwise-orphaned Hubs. 
         
         I figure that the reader will probably not go to my profile and see article titles there.  But at the end of one Hub, if they read to the end, they will see 1-2 titles that may interest them in other Hubs I've published.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Baileybearposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            I currently have mine in groups according to theme.  but if they don't rotate, I might put them in mini groups of 3

            replyreport
            1. 85

               Aficionadaposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               I'm not really sure how you see that as an advantage.  How would rotating make it better?  How would having groups limited to three be an improvement?  I'm not trying to challenge, but just to understand, your thinking.
               
               I think Mark Ewbie described it very well.  If one page does very well, then positioning it carefully within the group can possibly lead the reader to other articles.  Why limit that to just three? 
               
               If a reader starts with the Hub that is either the first or the last in the group, then there is only one choice of link at the bottom of the Hub.  If the reader starts with the middle one (of three) then there are two choices; but once they move to one of the two, they are at the end of the string.  But if there are (for example) eight Hubs based around one theme and grouped together, then the reader could potentially move from one to another through the entire group, through eight Hubs. That would provide more opportunities for clicks, it would provide more traffic (I think), and it would provide more chances that the reader would love your work, tweet it or favorite it and perhaps even link to it.  Personally, I want to encourage my readers to read every bit of my work that would interest them.

               replyreport
6. 68

   Richieb799posted 11 years ago

   I never noticed this feature before lol, I may do this when I get chance

   replyreport
7. 79

   timorousposted 11 years ago

   I usually group related hubs whenever possible, but my stuff is all over the map, so there's likely to be something that doesn't fit with anything else until I write at least one more hub along the same lines.
   
   At the moment, I have one orphaned hub, but I send it my love, bags of green tea and biscuits once a week

   replyreport
8. 77

   wheelinalloverposted 11 years ago

   All of my hubs were orphan until I read this post. LOL Now there are only two, which just don't fit anywhere or together. I will have to see if I can add some brothers so they won't be alone. LOL

   replyreport
9. 83

   earnestshubposted 11 years ago

   I deorphanificate them regular like.

   replyreport
10. 81

    Mark Ewbieposted 11 years ago

    Little bit more on this group thing. 
    
    I get hardly any search traffic but I check Analytics throroughly - search terms and pages.  I know for a fact that some people come in on a keyword and then sometimes look at other group links. Not many - but some.
    
    They read the page, and there at the bottom before the comments are the suggested links to your other pages in that group.  It is a fairly powerful option, particularly if your groups are tight and meaningful to the visitor.
    
    IF they enjoyed the page, found it useful, entertaining, whatever - they MIGHT just choose that link.  It's right there after their reading experience.
    
    Pcunix (where is he?) got me thinking about this, along with many other hints and tips of course.
    
    edit: Sorry to go on. One more thing.  If you do a new cracking popular page then by placing it carefully within a group you can raise the profile of other pages you are trying to get some interest in. It all helps.

    replyreport
11. 74

    sofsposted 11 years ago

    I always put my hubs in groups so the are displayed below each hub and act as a link.
    
    Related articles are easily accessible to the reader.
    
    I do it at the time of publishing each hub... very rarely do I find orphaned hubs !!
    
    When some hubs fall into multiple categories, grouping works well.
    
    Easy to find and edit and you do not have to go through the complete list.

    replyreport
12. 59

    spudsposted 11 years ago

    No orphans here. All hubs grouped and accounted for.

    replyreport
13. 65

    superwagsposted 11 years ago

    Ahhh! I'm entirely orphaned! What the hell is that?!

    replyreport
14. 61

    WoodsmensPostposted 11 years ago

    Little more than half of mine are orphans. Its on the list to fix

    replyreport