A quick update...... I have about a dozen fashion hubs and posted here a couple of days ago that for one day my traffic increased by 25% and I had red arrows on all my fashion hubs.
It didn't last long though, as over the last couple of days, traffic has gone back to normal levels and has even dropped on my best hub
So at the moment, I am not seeing any benefit from the new layout.
Like many others, I really dislike the large boxes on the right hand side.
- They take up too much width, please make the article wider, it is too narrow
- They are unrelated to my hub
- They are too big
The initial boost may have been from hubbers in search of Fashion and beauty hubs to check out the new looks
My latest beauty hub got a boost in traffic too.
Yup, but that's either people clicking to check out some beauty hubs or some hubbers are being frustrated because your hub flashes right on top and you may be drawing traffic from them
But, overall it's just going to help the people with no traffic.
I actually like the big box format. I would prefer it to be lower on the page, so that my reader gets a chance to read my hub first. I would also prefer the hubs in those big boxes to be mine, or my choice. At the very least, give me a chance to veto the ones I don't want.
Another plus, I found out ancestry has its collection for free until the 10th, so I guess there is a positive in looking at the hub.
Still trying to work out how I feel about this but here are a couple of things I have noticed. Some of the other hubs displayed are not related and work against the subject of my page.
For example a hub on baby products has a hub with revealing fancy dress costumes for women next to it, great.
The hubs at the foot of the page same type of problem.
Plus how will this effect my search results, I have been given a domain to keep my writing 'isolated' now I have all these hubs on related and unrelated topics - by other people on the same page.
The impact of a fashion hub is lost if you have photos around it that are larger than the Amazon images in the hub.
Well let's see how it goes it could be unexpected good news, as it may be based on something technical that I am unaware of. I expect the need to add more images and move the layouts around will keep me busy for awhile. Thank goodness, I have finished planting out the potatoes.
My tomato seedlings have sprouted! Made a new propagator for them today, out of catering-sized margarine tubs and old CD-ROMs. Knew that Windows 95 installation disk would come in handy eventually
Sorry, complete thread hijack there. My apologies.
I think it is step in the right direction. Fewer ads above the fold, a focus on content, big invitations to explore related pages.
If HP advertisers are OK with the ad placement, getting them down the page a little will not harm our income.
I think the hubscore is out of place and I wonder if the share thing should say 'like this page' rather 'than like this hub'. A lot of visitors will have no idea what a hub is.
Or is this part of hubpages branding strategy? (I'm all for branding the site).
Also, fashion might benefit from a different color scheme. (just don't change it for tech!).
I hate it! I just stopped in one of my fashion hubs and was shocked. It looked like a big mess. I liked it when the related hubs were displayed in a small format which looked neat and tidy. And all those huge pix at the end just got on my nerves. Hate to sound like an old curmudgeon but the whole concept looks too splashy and trashy. And confusing.
I commented early yesterday in this topic, and one of the things I mentioned was the slow load time of the hub. Now it is really slow, even for me with top of the line internet connection. This will cause folks to hit the back button and go somewhere else. I think you need to rethink all of the photos trying to load. It is eating up bandwidth.
Also, one of my fashion hubs has a video in it. It is not autoplay, but when I looked at the hub last night, I heard a video playing. Low and behold, I scrolled down to about the middle of the related hubs battleground and found a video ad running which would be conflicting with my hub video if someone clicked on it to view it.
Just noticed this - I think we have lost the chance to select the two hubs from the relevant group to appear at the foot of a hub.
You're right! Our Group arrows have disappeared!!!
We have other people's Hubs plastered prominently all over our Hubs, and we're not even given two measly links to our own. Now I'm really upset.
I don't mind losing the arrows (they'd be swamped by the images anyway), if the top right-hand image could be the next Hub in the Group. That would be the most logical way to do it.
The Google Adsense ad at the bottom of the page which generates income for the author is now swamped by a sea of Pinterest images - no one will ever see it let alone click on it - another source of lost income for the author.
Due to this layout visual appeal of the hubs not only increased substantially but they look more professional also! Exceptional work and let me congratulate you guys! But where's the plus-one button?
It would be helpful if someone can tell if it is improving or having the opposite effect on Google search traffic to the pages that have under gone the transformation. I am not best suited to working this one out.
The reasons I am curious besides the obvious one, is that I can recall reading a couple of months ago that they did not 'like' ads or photos at the top above the fold.
Then more recently that they would favor an image that was relevant even if the text that accompanied it was not 'brilliant'.
OK that is my way of reading it and I may have put 2and 2 together and come up with 5.
Another thought - If I am concerned about scantily clad women in photos next to my baby wear pages. What on earth will happen when this idea rolls out onto the religious pages?
Just another update from me to make sure that it is noticed should staff every review this. The load time is horrible. I have two Fashion and Beauty hubs up. One is new. I am having problems loading the pages quickly with the abundance of new images and I have had friends where I have backlinked to, complain that the hubs are loading much to slowly and they simply won't spend the time watching the cursor spin in a blue round little circle. Lost viewers, lost revenue.
Does no one else care that the Groups function has been removed??
I don't as I doubt even 1% of the visitors actually notice it!
The way that you could work this in the past was good, it worked so that your most relevant 2 hubs appeared at the foot of a hub and was simple to do.
You went into the groups page and you moved one hub above and one hub below the one you had just published or wanted to promote. These would then be the ones featured at the foot of that hub on the left and right arrow buttons.
The importance of the ability to do that for me is - I have seasonal hubs and would move the most relevant ones into position.
I know it works, correction has worked. Because I have seen the difference when I publish a hub and do not locate it into a group but leave it languishing in the groups section that contains unpublished hubs.
As for not being important - I think that it was possible to tweak which of you pages people visited next, not every time but sometimes.
Are you referring to the two links with arrows at the bottom of the image below?
I don't think they are group related. I have asked about these before and they are simply the hubs that you have looked at previously in a session (I'm not worried about them being missing as I never use them).
If you are referring to something else, then ignore my comment.
I am much more concerned about loss of income issues and ranking.
Yup she is. They're absent on the fashion hubs!
Apologies if this has been answered already as I haven't yet got to the end of the latest posts. The two hub titles you see under the voting button are not hubs you have recently visited. They are the hubs that are immediately before and after the hub you are on when you sorted them into your own groups in 'My Account-edit groups'. If you haven't ever done this yet essentially this area allows you to create your own groups/categories in order to sort all your own hubs easily. Depending on what order you place them in within each group will determine which two titles are before and after that hub and therefore appear/appeared at the bottom of the page on that hub, (as shown in the screenshot) I hope this makes sense
They are definitely group related. You can even control which ones appear on the Hub, by changing the order of your Hubs within Groups.
Sorry they are group related - I was wrong
I don't believe your statement to be correct! From my memory the Author could control the position of these Two Hubs from the accounts page. Excuse me if I am wrong?
I agree with you Marissa. Removing the group hubs link is a very bad move on Hubpages part also.
It appears that HP is trying to send the viewers WE bring in for Our hubs to Other Hubbers. Look at the huge related/unrelated image at top right to start with. It is more prominent than the hub in which it appears.
It is almost like, "well, this link to this hub got you here, but...this one (HP is advertising) is better for you!"
I care a lot about losing the two most relevant group hubs links to the current hub. Some of my hubs are in two parts and that feature was really useful for further reading.
I also agree with Michael
"I agree with you Marissa. Removing the group hubs link is a very bad move on Hubpages part also. "
so to sum up: We are losing:
1. The main large advert in the side bar at the top
2. Losing the feature: "Read More Hubs By... (author)
3. Losing the feature: Contact author
4. Losing the previously discrete list of related hubs in the side bar which didn't take hours to upload.
5.Also losing "Answer the question" from side bar
6.Losing all Tags
7. Losing group feature (2 links to most relevant hubs of our own at the bottom of Hub through the group feature.)
What do we gain?
Longer loading time
A whole bunch of links to irrelevant hubs by other Hubbers.
Does anyone know what the benefits of the proposed changes are to us Hubbers?
Can we vote on this?
@ Sue, I agree with you and even though I welcome change and love the idea of change, I don't care for this one at all. I like the background and the look of the capsules but the layout is all wrong.
We were told to link to unrelated Hub was a violation of HP terms last year after the Panda hit. Hubs were unpublished because of this. NOW...HP is placing unrelated Hub in the page. Double-standard ring a bell???
Yes Michael, double standards for sure. I mentioned it before and mention it again:
Printing the same pictures and hub descriptions on every hub in the same category is the biggest form of duplicate content anyone has ever committed. We are not allowed to print duplicate content, so why are HubPages forcing us to do so? Insane. They didn't even give any reasons for the change, let alone how it could benefit individual Hubbers.
A couple of my hubs in this category that consistently get clicks EVERY day have not had ONE in three days....none of them! WTF! I would appreciate knowing if this layout is going to stay the same so I can move my sh$t ASAP. I am losing money and NOT happy. These are hubs that always earn me money...yes, even on weekends and holidays. For none of them to have one Adsense click all weekend makes me absolutely furious. They are seeing traffic, but clearly readers have all these options to click on rather than ads now. Hubpages PLEASE let us keep our old layout. Losing revenue by the day. This stinks!
Yah... I'm pretty much eating my words right now about liking the new layout. Like you, I seem to be losing consistent income. As such, clearly can't be a fan... I'm also really disappointed the group function seems to have been phased out. I like being able to choose two hubs with the arrow function. As I looked at more of my hubs (and others) I don't like how the big picture on the right looks like part of the hub. Pretty sure that will initiate some willy nilly clicking OFF my hub. I don't think the new layout is conducive to revenue-generating. I'm not even selling Amazon products now, for some reason.
Thanks for trying HP, but I'm pretty sure this one's a fail.
Ughhh that's crappy that you're losing money too. Selfishly...I'm glad I'm not the only one though. lol I really hate this!
Ditto, my clicks have gone down too on the new lay-out Hubs.
[Hubpages PLEASE let us keep our old layout. Losing revenue by the day. This stinks!]
Maybe you are overstaffed now and have nothing better to do than mess things up for us by first trying to become like YouTube, with the video hubs that only allow one video, now with this craze for images, trying to compete with Google Images and Ping?
Why can't HubPages remain the decent article site it has been up until now, and concentrate staff's energies on reading more Hubs and weeding out the rubbish instead of adding to it? Sorry, but this really makes me angry.
I have another concern this is to do with - if you use the standard capsule for your Amazon images and do not use another method to add an image of the product; the size of the photo on the right makes your Amazon products images look insignificant.
The picture featured at the top of the hub, the first thing people see, has nothing to do with the hub. One of my hubs, about jeans, the image displayed is one of women in henins - those tall pointy hats they wore in medieval times. I can see someone coming to that hub and saying to themselves, "what is this? It makes no sense!" And they are gone from the git-go.
It takes forever to load...
About design and pictures alignment.The photos to other Hubs should be smaller and they should be aligned horizontally. That means that the heights should be identical, not the width as they are at the moment (put into columns rather than rows). When you read text you don't want one letter or word to be higher or lower than the previous or following text. It is the same with reading pictures. All fotos should be smaller and aligned horizontally. Compare the two layouts below:
1. Google Images - aligned in rows
2. HubPages - aligned in columns
A compromised would be to publish 3 or 4 rows of smaller sized images aligned horizontally, with an option for more, like on Google Images. Then the loading time would be considerably reduced and the whole page would look a lot better.
I hope you are reading this Simone & Co.
I saw this article link from sunforged on my HP feed last night and found it very helpful with possible solutions to our common concerns with the new layout. I just got his permission to post it here, so give a read. I appreciate the way in which he has presented the concerns and solutions without being hyper critical.
Hopefully he may come along at some point (today being a holiday, many of us are busy with family, etc.) and share.
http://hubsacademy.com/31/newhubbers/wh … ard-ripoff
I also noticed Paul Edmondson posted this on another related thread. He is looking for ideas. HP is testing 3 different related hub algorithms.
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/95799?p … ost2045512
Enjoy the day! I'm in between family celebrations.
I agree with all of sunforged's points. The new layout definitely has room for a lot of improvement!
Also, I do hope that Hubpages is using something like kissmetrics to test the impact of layout changes.
Well, I had to check this out, so I clicked on Delores' great piece on the history of bathing suits. I have to say I'm a bit (or more than a bit) offended at some of the pictures. The clutter goes on forever - the bottom of the page is a mile long now. Many of the photos are more revealing than we would be allow to post as illustrations for our hubs. I particularly love the one in black stockings and high-heels that looks like a bondage scene or something from an adult movie house.
Maybe HP arranged a financial agreement with Pinterest to trade clicks or something, but there sure doesn't seem to be a filtering mechanism. Let's hope that, like many things, this still has some kinks to iron out. Not meaning to be suggestive there . . .
That is it! They are trying to be like Pinterest!!! I hate the pinterest cluttered pages and want nothing to do with the site or the Pinterest Format here at HP!
This extract from the April fool's Hubpages blog (April 2012) rang a bell with me. I think the tongue may have gone through the cheek!
"HubPages will assume ownership of all of the original photos you’ve uploaded to the site. We will be collaborating with Pinterest to assemble them into a book ...........".
Every article may be destined to become a Pinterest Book
The renaissance fashion hub shows women in bathing suits, bras, and there is even a naked one there. I'm not quite so sure it fits with the photos in the hub itself. If you want an old fashioned feel to the hub, these more modern pictures takes you right out of that mood.
I imagine it won't be as much of an issue in other categories, but I was really shocked at the "related" hub images that appeared when I was skimming through several fashion hubs. I had no idea there was so much nudity, let alone fetishism, on Hubpages. It wuldn't bother me as much if the photos weren't SO HUGE . . .
I also can't stand the scrolling images at the bottom; pages that never end are one of my pet peeves. I could live with just three or four rows of related hub images at the bottom, but overall I really don't like this layout. I have to echo the complaints I've already read: unrelated "related" content; top right image too big and distracting; missing "group" links to our own hubs; ugly voting buttons; missing G+ button, etc.
Please don't do this to us!
Absolutely hate it for the concerns already expressed. This does not seem like a decision you made with the best interest of hubbers in mind.
If I put a Markewbie tag on all my content does that increase the chances of my pages showing up as being related?
Who knows its a secret formula - HP has hired Panda to fix it - see the other thread ( Paul E => 3 algos being considered)
You know, without dropping into rant mode, I reckon for all the sophistication putting my name in one of the tags on all my pages might do the trick.
In fact... making it the ONLY tag might be even better. It's only an internal thing. Yeah, I know you need two... markewbie and markewbie2.
It's kind of important to me that that top right hand picture is one of mine, not some generic piece of crap ripped off the internet.
Whoops. Nearly lost it.
No, I tried it. Whatever criteria they use to determine "relatedness", it's not tags. I think it's probably more to do with titles.
I tried tags too and I surely can say that its not the criteria. I'm saying its more to do with the category which is more prominent than the title. Because I got a related hub on saucepans on my kitchen hood hubs (saw it just once though)
After viewing several of the new design Hubs, I think the large amount of pictures is confusing to the eye, but may be exactly what younger people, like 18 - 29, might enjoy. It's like the fast-food menu board with too much on it so you can't read it, but younger people don't seem to have that problem.
As Marcy wrote, a few of the images are rather offensive and some look like copyrighted material w/o consent. At any rate, my vote is that images are too big and too many right now, for what it's worth.
Just for your info, I'm 19 and I don't like the way the hubs are! I don't mind the fast food menus though as I don't know what I exactly want and that's a menu for me to choose from. But, when it comes to hubs people search on search engines and they know exactly what they want so why do we have to give them a menu with a huge pic of fries when they clearly asked for nuggets?
Would McD advertise fries or whatever chicken from Burger King? That's what HP is doing by advertising related hubs from competitors with huge photos on the right hand side of our hubs, when the author has many related hubs of their own. That sucks big time!
Yup, exactly! Also, too much self advertising too isn't good. At least not at the top of the hubs! I hate spammy pages and I'm sure there are plenty who agree. And if many of us agree I'm sure most of our visitors would fall in the same category right?
I'm still waiting for the stats. It's one week right? Not the HP stats but any individual hubbers who always had some fashion hubs up? - How's the traffic doing keeping in mind the easter hols and stuff.
In fashion and beauty, the magazine style layout is ok to me. But for other categories, this layout might not be right. Imagine you wrote a hub on foods to eat to have glowing skin, and the related hub being advertised on the top right hand side of your page is showing a huge photo of skin boils. That is gross!
I just noticed my "How do you tell someone they have a body odour problem without offending them" Hub has a related Hub called "Why does everyone hate me" on the top right. My picture can't even be seen until you scroll down the page, but the so called 'related' hubs picture is clearly in view from the moment you arrive on my article.
LOL sorry, Mysty, can't help laughing as the title of the related hub on your page seems grossly out of place.
LOL, that is cute. Guess everyone would hate being around someone with bad body odor!?!?!?!?
But I see you problem with the related hub. It is an issue.
It is kind of funny I admit, although not when it happens on a massive scale as it will do if they roll out these changes site wide.
Misty's example of an unrelated - but supposedly related hub on the same page is amusing.
However there may be times when this type of thing could be downright offensive. Supposing you have a strongly held view about something and the hub that appears next to yours is totally against and opposed to your beliefs and principles.
On another forum Paul E has said:
".........we are testing about three different related hub algorithms. We are looking at things like user engagement and seo."
When I switched one of my travel hubs to fashion and beauty (because it fits there also), I switched it back because I found the top related hub image so overpowering, I was embarrassed to have it on my page. I didn't read the related hub, and it was probably very well written, but the title and image were too distracting to my hub. It was not a good match. (It had nothing to do with the author or hub content, just the title and image in juxtaposition to my hub page.)
Now my only hub in this preview category has decreased in views. I don't know if it
is because of all the unrelated links on the page or holiday related but it usually has more traffic than it now does. I'm watching closely to see how it performs. It's also a hub which receives global traffic, sometimes from areas that may not have high speed access. I'm wondering if the slow loading time (with all the hubs at the bottom) has affected views.
The layout looks nice and fresh, just the related hubs thing might need some tweaking as many have already said. Are we going to be able to limit the amount of related hubs? or has someone already answered that? Not sure about the way that they are reloading as you scroll for what seems like forever!
Out of curiosity, I clicked on a random hub and followed the related hub image, as I'm sure anyone would have if they landed on that page. I never realized there were so many hubs about bikinis on HubPages!
I just noticed that my Fashion/Beauty hub now has one of my grouped hubs as the top related hub, and moved the previous top related hub below the ad. Nice!
I think the new layout is beautiful. The only problem is, it will quickly lead the person who lands on my page to another. I heard about the new format but didn't pay the notification, but then forgot about it. I stumbled a beauty and fashion on line quite by accident. I was like ohhh, ahhh, just clicking on the pretty pictures. It will definitely give HubPages more CPV, but I am not sure it will be a financial winner for the writers.
Seeing so many fashion hubs in one place with large images really brings home how many people think it is OK to just lift photos from other places.
I had assumed people used public domain or properly acquired images. I have always used my own photos or public domain images, approved for commercial use.
Is not lifting photos from websites the same as using people's writing and cutting and pasting text?
I wonder how many images on here (and probably other sites) are from people who have added them thinking it is OK as long as you credit the place you took it from?
What makes it worse is that the original author has these images shoved on their page without the attribution or credit given for the source - who is liable?
The original concept was that a hubber held the copyright for their article published on HP - the related hubs images shoved on the page break this concept.
Another aspect is that many of these images may have been essentially internal and hidden because the hubs may have not been popular and appeared on many search results. These images suddenly get a fee ride on the articles that attract the traffic simply by being related ( I call them fleas). In fact they may have been selected as related because of their lovely images. Its a worry! It the invasion of the fleas!
Although the comment about keeping the reader on this site albeit with another person's pages is relevant.
Factors like the bounce rate and how long a person spends on a page will surely be affected. If a reader is distracted enough to just skim through picture after picture without reading; then does that not alter out ratings from search engines?
Add to that is the possibility of a person who sees an irrelevant photo next to your page and decides to click back to the search result almost instantly.
I suppose the tests being run by HubPages will reveal if this is happening or not and be taken into account.
I am not against change for improvement but I am someone who likes change to bring good things with it.
Hey everyone! Thanks so much for your feedback. We've just rolled out two new tweaks to the design that are described in a new forum thread. We hope you like 'em!
You've acknowledged the feedback but have you read the feedback?
Almost 300 related hubs at the bottom and the following phrases being added to my hub: "gay porn stars", "sexy chest", "sexy men who do not shave", "attract gay men"
I'm not sure how a Star Wars character in cartoon form would invoke gay the attraction of gay men. But if it were a male headshot, taken outdoors and maybe throw in a lens flare, then I could see how it could happen.
@Will Apse, it's stuff like that remark why people don't want to use the forums. Why would you say something like that and this is not the forum for this. I think you were rude.
@Simone, when I scroll through the related hubs at the bottom of the page, I noticed that the HP grey area (like the one at the bottom of this screen) pops up and blocks the view. Is it intentional for the pop up or is it a glitch?
Well as a person who has lots of fashion hubs, in my case fashion history, I thought that maybe I'd shut up and give it all time. Now I see that my fashion history hubs, which were doing quite well, are getting a lot LESS traffic. Which does HP as well as myself no good at all.
I have not had one click on any fashion hubs since this layout was put in place. Not one! Not even on one that sees consistently good earnings on its clicks. This is BS! Not that Hubpages cares....clearly. Thanks for ruining a good thing. Really used to love this platform. So incredibly disappointed.
Copyright © 2019 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 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.|