Team HP| Stop unfeaturing for traffic...PLEASE!

Jump to Last Post 1-23 of 23 discussions (133 posts)
  1. TIMETRAVELER2 profile image100
    TIMETRAVELER2posted 2 years ago

    http://usercontent1.hubimg.com/12803860_f520.jpg
    Awhile back the team started unfeaturing articles due to lack of traffic.  Many here think this is a bad idea, and I agree.  Doing this upsets many writers and has nothing to do with quality or how Google views our work...except for the fact that leaving low or no traffic articles online has the potential of increasing the ratio of informational articles to those with ads...which could be a very good thing.

    There are many high quality hubs on this site that get "turned off" that would help HP get back some of the credibility it has lost this past year.

    So, how about it Team HP?  Stop this foolishness and spend your time getting rid of the dross instead of the good stuff!

    1. Rafiq23 profile image86
      Rafiq23posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I agree with you TimeTraveler. It also gives a signal to the Google Bots that the article has been removed and consequently it affects the overall SEO of HubPages. If HP wants to retain high quality hubs, they can do it by emailing the hubber to improve it. They should pinpoint the grey areas in the hubs that are required to be improved.

      1. PegCole17 profile image95
        PegCole17posted 2 years agoin reply to this

        When Editor's Choice hubs are unfeatured for lack of traffic, it has nothing to do with gray areas that need improvement. They need traffic. Taking them away from the other featured hubs further reduces their ability to attract traffic.

    2. NateB11 profile image94
      NateB11posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I agree. While in the past I knew HP unfeatured due to lack of traffic because it was a more viable way to get rid of bad content, I currently started seeing the detriment of the policy. Many well written articles will end getting moved off of HP because of the policy. I know that I personally no longer try to fix Hubs that are de-featured due to lack of traffic and just move them to one of my sites or somewhere else. And the problem is, only keyword optimized Hubs will remain on HP and this doesn't assure us of quality content at all and just makes the site look like a massive keyword stuffed site.

      1. Barbara Kay profile image91
        Barbara Kayposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        I agree. I'm just putting my 2 cents in, so they can see more writers agree.

      2. DrMark1961 profile image99
        DrMark1961posted 2 years agoin reply to this

        You stated "only keyword optimized hubs will remain", which I think is wrong. Only well written hubs that are linked to by other sites, shared by others, and get good traffic because of being linked to will remain.
        A hub does not have to be stuffed with keywords to get good traffic.

        1. NateB11 profile image94
          NateB11posted 2 years agoin reply to this

          I'm not entirely against the policy of defeaturing low traffic Hubs. But the point was made that a site doesn't necessarily need every single post to get high traffic to be seen as a good site by Google, which I think is a good point. Also, HP keeps Hubs featured that get Google traffic, so that sharing of Hubs you refer to is not something that keeps a Hub featured. The primary way to get Google traffic is through keyword optimization. I have strong doubts that Hubs that get good traffic are getting that traffic because of being linked to; very strong doubts. And they certainly aren't all of the ones that get good traffic, as you claim. Not even possible. Also I never said a Hub had to be stuffed with keywords to get good traffic. I basically said that it looks like the site only has posts with keywords if those are the only posts allowed to remain. Which I think would make a site look odd.

          1. DrMark1961 profile image99
            DrMark1961posted 2 years agoin reply to this

            I am not sure how Google works, but I think if someone reads your hub, bookmarks it and then links it to their own blog, that hub then gets better position on the SERPS. If it was just a matter of adding a bunch of keywords to rank high in the search engines, anyone could add a lot of keywords without providing useful information and would rank highly. Do I know this is the way it works, for sure? Definitely not. I may be totally wrong, but this is how I have noticed pages ranking better in the recent past.
            My apologies if I misunderstood what you were saying, but I just think optimizing for keywords is not working like it used to.
            (I think we need to send this question to Google to find the answer. Got any buddies over there???)

            1. NateB11 profile image94
              NateB11posted 2 years agoin reply to this

              It does sound like a good question for Google. I actually looked around the Net before coming back here to see how Google views sites that are "over-optimized". It is interesting because a site can be over-optimized, of course, and Google penalizes for that; but I guess we've alluded to this in our discussion, because we've talked about keyword stuffing. Also, too much link building is a form of over optimization too. Google began penalizing too much SEO on sites to give "mom and pop" sites a fighting chance. Also, Matt Cutts has said that the important part is still compelling content, stuff people want to return to and keep reading, as you said. So, I see your point and seems Google does too.

              My main point was in line with the original post here, and that was about unfeaturing Hubs for lack of traffic. So, now our question is what makes a Hub get more traffic than others, because those are the Hubs that remain featured. I'm not sure either. I've always felt that keywords are the crucial element for any article to get traffic; visibility in the search engine, in other words. And most vets here at HP have repeated that mantra; that it's the keywords. And I have had success with appropriately using keywords. So, that is my understanding on how to get traffic. Even when I have a successful article in terms of social shares and organic links, it was first spotted in the search engine for keywords. I've also had Hubs get quite a few good quality organic backlinks and then drop down in the SERPs.

              Like I said, I don't really know either. You might be right, I could be wrong, and vice versa. Or we're both right in some way or another.

    3. Titia profile image95
      Titiaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I agree too.

    4. OldRoses profile image96
      OldRosesposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      One thing that HP seems not to have taken into consideration is seasonality.  I write gardening hubs.  Naturally, I get most of my traffic from late winter (when gardeners are thinking about their gardens, ordering seeds, starting seeds, etc) through summer, after which the gardening season starts to wind down and traffic falls dramatically on my hubs which are then unfeatured because of lack of traffice.  It doesn't matter how much "tweaking" I do, traffic will not return until gardeners start thinking about their gardens again.  I'm okay with this, but HP is not.  I am being unfairly discriminated against because my niche is seasonal.

      1. TIMETRAVELER2 profile image100
        TIMETRAVELER2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

        I feel the same way with regards to my recreational vehicle hubs.  I would hope they take this into consideration when making decisions about traffic.  So far, I have not had a problem, but I expect I will at some point.

      2. cherylone profile image91
        cheryloneposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        I totally agree with that.  I write a lot of hubs that are seasonal and they get unfeatured due to low traffic when out of season.  I have asked before if that could be a consideration for change in the process.

        1. Kylyssa profile image97
          Kylyssaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          You could also write or rewrite your seasonal hubs so they get at least a trickle of traffic all year round. None of my holiday hubs has been un-featured. Approximately 9% of my views this month have come from seasonal hubs for which the season has already passed or is yet to come.

          There's a hub on the topic "In The Spotlight" on my profile.

          1. Mark Ewbie profile image87
            Mark Ewbieposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            What a coincidence!  I have a slightly better hub on the same topic.  It's in my spotlight as well.  Feel free to read it and some others, and maybe share to some crappy spam fest on Facebook.

            1. Kylyssa profile image97
              Kylyssaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

              I don't see why you feel the need to be nasty. It's not brain surgery to write seasonal content with getting year round views in mind and the piece could help people get the views they need to avoid having seasonal hubs un-featured.

              1. Mark Ewbie profile image87
                Mark Ewbieposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                "I wrote a hub".

                That's why.

                1. Kylyssa profile image97
                  Kylyssaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  Gotcha. No one could write a hub on a subject that has any relevance to people complaining about that exact subject.

                  It's not like HP is going to change the policy and keep hubs that don't get views featured so hubbers need to figure out how to get views to their seasonal hubs year round instead if they wish to keep them featured.

                  Why would I bother to paraphrase an entire hub on altering or creating seasonal articles to get year round views to put it up here so as to not offend people like you when it already exists on a hub?

                  1. Mark Ewbie profile image87
                    Mark Ewbieposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                    My point is self-publicity.  "I wrote a hub" brings out the worst in me.  Once every six months I am contractually obliged to mention it.

                    The views generated by it are worthless.  A persons opinion of their own writing is similar.

                    I think that covers it.

                  2. makingamark profile image65
                    makingamarkposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                    Well said Kylyssa!

    5. Sulabha profile image84
      Sulabhaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      My most popular Hub-Media, Mass Communication Theories & Anna Hazare Movement took time to get readership.
      I feel that along with readership, the country should also be considered. For example in India, people in 40's are not very computer friendly. I attribute this to my other 3 feature hubs. 2 out of this are targeted at women. And I know they are going to take time to get popular.

    6. OldRoses profile image96
      OldRosesposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Okay, this is now officially out of control.  I updated a hub that was unfeatured for traffic.  It was unfeatured again for quality.  It's a very short hub.  There is not much information about the flower I was describing.  In order to get the hub featured, I was forced to add a lengthy discussion about cuttings that had nothing to do with the flower I was writing about.  HP has to get over their obsession with length.  They have to stop forcing us to ruin our hubs with filler.  I use an SEO tool on my website and as long as my entries are more than 300 words, they pass SEO.  The hub in question was well over 300 words but HP still refused to feature it.  I get way more traffic on my website (niche site) than I do on HP and none of my articles have stupid quizzes, polls, or videos.  Very few of the articles run over 1000 words.  Most range between 500 and 900 words.  Yet Google sends me lots of traffic every single day.  The only reason I stay on HP at this point is because of the traffic I get from Pinterest.  I don't want to lose the links to Pinterest.

    7. Misfit Chick profile image76
      Misfit Chickposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I partially agree... from what I have heard, HP can get a little trigger happy with unfeaturing articles. While I have had a couple hubs unfeatured, I agreed with the 'unfeaturing'. Also, every single time someone has complained about an article that was unfeatured - and wanted someone to look at it for an opinion as to 'why' it was unfeatured; the reason for the unfeaturing has been obvious to the point that I no longer respond to those kind of questions anymore.

      I don't like to back up HP because I think they do a LOT of things the wrong way in here. For instance, how NORMAL and convenient would it be to have a word processor that helps correct spelling AS you write the article; as well as having them ACTUALLY looked over by an editor for approved BEFORE they are published.

      All of this 'undoing as they go' instead of catching things before they become published is just plain 'ol stupid; and obviously, it makes people angry.

    8. Yvonne Decelis profile image74
      Yvonne Decelisposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I agree completely. Makes me want to use another page for my writing, tbh.

    9. Kristen Howe profile image89
      Kristen Howeposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I agree with you Time Traveler. I've had 25 out of my now 89 hubs with the NFT symbol since late November 2015. After a quick fix by adding more words to the photo/ad capsules, it's been reapproved by HP. *sigh*

      1. jackclee lm profile image81
        jackclee lmposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        No need to add any words. I found any small edit such as a punctuation is sufficient to make the hub featured again. All it takes to bypass the automated system is to change the time stamp. It is a pain and HubPages should really reconsider this policy.

        1. Marisa Wright profile image96
          Marisa Wrightposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          If they fixed that "bug", your Hubs would stay unFeatured for lack of traffic - is that what you want?

          1. jackclee lm profile image81
            jackclee lmposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            I am not saying it is a "bug". I am just commenting on the HubPages QAP process at this moment. We are all trying to understand how things work here. Here is my current understanding...
            1. It seems that HP uses an AI system to assess the quality of hubs. A primitive one at that.
            2. After a hub is featured, it is periodically reviewed for traffic.
            3. After approx. 6 months, if there is lack of traffic, the hub becomes un-featured automatically.
            4. The hubber can just edit the hub with any small changes and save. This will automatically get the hub processed by QAP again and it will be featured by the next day.

            My suggestion for HubPages is this, why not just leave the hubs featured in the first place. Take out the "traffic" limitation. I think that is what many people here are commenting about.
            Some are under the miss conception that they need to revised the hub in order to be featured again.
            BTW, the reason I say the current QAP process is primitive is because of my recent test hub. I always suspected that the QAP process is not too rigorous and my test hub "Ideal debate format" proves my point. There are no human editors checking each hub for quality.

            1. Barbara Kay profile image91
              Barbara Kayposted 2 years agoin reply to this

              I'm beginning to think we can comment on this to Hubpages and they don't even read our messages. So forever great hubs will be unfeatured for lack of traffic and we'll be wasting our time that long getting them featured again.

            2. Marisa Wright profile image96
              Marisa Wrightposted 2 years agoin reply to this

              HubPages has explained why the traffic limitation exists:   if a Hub doesn't get traffic from Google, then there are two possible reasons - either it's a rarely-searched subject, or Google doesn't like it. 

              If Google doesn't like it, then HubPages wants to hide it from Google (a site's Panda score is based on its worst posts).   HubPages has decided that's SO important, they're prepared to accept some "collateral damage" - i.e. the Hubs on rarely-searched subjects. 

              If you look at it like that, then the weakness in the system isn't that Hubs are unFeatured for low traffic - it's the fact that it's so easy to get them reFeatured again, with no real changes made.

              1. jackclee lm profile image81
                jackclee lmposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                Marisa, I understand your point. Why is HubPages so hung up on google? There are many other search engines out there. I was always curious why HP put so much emphasis on google. Why should our content be judged by google's criteria? Google is a search engine. It's main purpose is to index what is on the web and provide the best match for what people are seeking? Their algorithm is hidden and everyone is trying to game the system to get an upper hand. As such, they constantly tweek their algorithm.IMHO, HP should just put the best content out there and being featured should be the method of judging if a hub makes the cut. Once it is featured, let it be.

              2. TIMETRAVELER2 profile image100
                TIMETRAVELER2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                While this seems to make sense, it isn't exactly what is happening.

                I just had a hub unfeatured for traffic that had 1400 total views and 37 in the recent month.  The explanation was that all of the CURRENT views were from Hubpages and that an article must have at least some views from Google in order to be featured.

                I can't believe that all of my 1400 views came just from other writers here or from social networks.  What I can believe is that some machine saw that THIS MONTH I had the wrong kind of views and so was punished.

                I've reworked the article, and it is refeatured for now, but there is something inherently wrong with this kind of thinking.  Why would you get rid of a hub that has constantly produced just because right now it has too many social networking views!

                If you feel this way, then why encourage us to market our work and read each other's articles.  Am I missing something here?

  2. LuisEGonzalez profile image86
    LuisEGonzalezposted 2 years ago

    Agree. Many of my best articles have become unfeatured  and I no longer try to fix anything. The more articles that become unfeatured the bigger the chances that they will be moved somewhere else!

    1. Lizam1 profile image80
      Lizam1posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I am very disappointed with Hub Pages.  Initially, full of enthusiasm I wrote articles that were never going to "go viral" they were there becuase I enjoy sharing information.  Now many of the articles that had good stats are unfeatured.  I had been accepted as an apprentice hubber then that was dropped.  I see so much dross, overstuffed with keywords permitted to go through.  There are some really great writers here and I concur with much of what has already been said.  Please fix the things that need fixing and stop fixing that which is not broken.

  3. Blake Flannery profile image96
    Blake Flanneryposted 2 years ago

    Removing those hubs may decrease variety of topics. Then we are all just competing for the popular topics. Then that looks spammy.

    1. Rock_nj profile image94
      Rock_njposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I agree.  That has always been an issue I had with this traffic unfeature policy.  It tends to encourage writers to write popular stuff that is similar, instead of taking chances and writing what they want to write.

  4. makingamark profile image65
    makingamarkposted 2 years ago

    My policy is not to fix hubs which become unfeatured for lack of traffic.

    The only thing I do is move them to a site where they will get traffic - with the exact same content.

    1. Blake Flannery profile image96
      Blake Flanneryposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      How are you avoiding copies outranking your content after it's moved?

      1. suzettenaples profile image91
        suzettenaplesposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        I agree with everything written here.  Hubs should not be unfeatured because of lack of traffic but because of lack of quality only.  Some of my unfeatured hubs because of traffic do get traffic but they are never put back to featured status.

      2. Kylyssa profile image97
        Kylyssaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        I would assume she files DMCA reports on all the copies out there, waits for them to be removed, deletes the hub, gets the hub de-indexed from Google search, then moves its content. HubPages is particularly vulnerable to plagiarists for some reason so it's unlikely she'd have to file as many DMCA reports after the move to keep copies from outranking her writing.

    2. Rock_nj profile image94
      Rock_njposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      If you don't mind me asking, where do you move your Hubs to that they gain more traffic?

      1. makingamark profile image65
        makingamarkposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        I'm building mega niche websites on Weebly. It's relatively easy for me because I've always built lenses - now hubs - in clusters which means they can naturally congregate together on a larger site. I work on the basis that the smaller hubs get one page each and the bigger ones split up over several pages. That then means it's a lot easier to customise the meta descriptions and keywords for each page which in turn helps make the pages easier to find via a targeted search query. It's also much easier to spread Amazon products around the site and relate them much more closely to the relevant text.

        The vast majority of my traffic comes via Google. For me this underlines the feeling that a lot of us have had for some time - which is that HubPages is unfeaturing and unpublishing content which Google does not have a problem with.

        I should add that it's relatively straightforward for me as I already have a blog and a Facebook Page which both have a big following - so when I say I've moved content a lot of people get to know about this fast and that helps get those sites off the ground.

  5. viryabo profile image86
    viryaboposted 2 years ago

    I agree too.

    I just rewrite the unfeatured ones and take them to my blogs or website. I re-work them mainly because of possible theft/copy by article rogues, and also to improve on them if required.

    In a way I like that I'm increasing the articles on my other sites.

    Now my eggs are placed in more baskets.

  6. Mark Ewbie profile image87
    Mark Ewbieposted 2 years ago

    If a page gets bad I cry for a bit.

    I go see a man who gives me money.

    Then I do a special dance of dollars.
    http://usercontent1.hubimg.com/12804108_f1024.jpg

  7. pagesvoice profile image85
    pagesvoiceposted 2 years ago

    What I find amazing is how the staff at Hubpages waves the magic judgmental wand over articles posted. While I agree with the concept of making sure hubs are quality and error free of grammatical and spelling errors, I am still left in the black hole of wondering, who the heck are these people and what are their literary qualifications? What I find difficult to swallow is the shallowness of the powers to be here in their review process and yet, I have still had several of my hubs published in a magazine on a national level. I don't find this a fun venue any longer. Now that I've posted this response I will lay odds my Hubscore drops.

    1. DrMark1961 profile image99
      DrMark1961posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      So basically you are saying that although the site belongs to them they do not have the right to decide what they want to post?

      1. pagesvoice profile image85
        pagesvoiceposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        What I was relaying (apparently you missed my point) is how Hubpages was once an open atmosphere and one where contributors found this an enjoyable place to be. Hubpages moved the goal posts and changed the rules book. The consequence of their decisions has left many of us old timers either leaving this venue or not contributing any longer. As I mentioned in my reply, after writing my answer my Hubscore dropped 2 points. That happens every time I try to interact here.

        1. Jodah profile image88
          Jodahposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          +1

        2. DrMark1961 profile image99
          DrMark1961posted 2 years agoin reply to this

          You made your point when you told us all how you resented their magic wand.

          1. pagesvoice profile image85
            pagesvoiceposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            You have proven why many of us old timers (people who have been here longer than 3 years) aren't that active/have left Hubpages altogether. Snarkiness toward other hubbers, as exhibited in your responses, never reared its head years ago. However, respect and decorum for other contributors, apparently have been cast aside. I consistently had Hubscores in the high 90s to 100, but not anymore. I want to write about life's experiences and not about the proper way to thread a needle or how to put a leash on my dog.

            1. DrMark1961 profile image99
              DrMark1961posted 2 years agoin reply to this

              Snarky? That last sentence really sums up how nasty a person you can be. You must have learned that somewhere.
              Oh, by the way, in case you have forgotten, you might take the time to go over some of the old forums from years ago. Hubbers did not feel the need to always display "respect and decorum". Maybe you have a selective memory defect?
              (I have been here over 3 years.)

              1. pagesvoice profile image85
                pagesvoiceposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                Exactly what is your problem? Now you are saying I'm a nasty person with selective memory defect? It appears the person with an attitude is you and quite frankly, much to your chagrin, you are not the be all to end all in the writing community. My discussion with you is done and I neither have the time nor the inclination to engage in your sarcasm any longer. Have a nice day.

                1. DrMark1961 profile image99
                  DrMark1961posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  You call me snarky and wonder why I do not care for your attitude?
                  Good luck on your new site or publishing ventures outside of the internet.

    2. Marisa Wright profile image96
      Marisa Wrightposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I'm not sure I understand you, pagesvoice.  The QAP moderators do only the most basic checks and I am sure none of your Hubs would ever have failed QAP.

      In this thread we are talking about unFeaturing for lack of engagement - which is achieved using an automated filter, with no human intervention.    It is NOT in any way a reflection on the Hub's quality - it is purely and simply based on the amount of traffic the Hub is receiving. 

      That may seem nonsensical, but it is driven by the fact that HubPages relies almost entirely on Google for its readership - so its priority is to provide exactly what Google likes.

      When HP was doing well, it could afford to accept all kinds of articles, whether Google liked it or not (provided it didn't actually break any of Google's rules).  Times are tougher now, so HubPages has changed its attitude:  if Google isn't sending traffic to your article, that could be a sign of dislike - so HubPages will hide it from Google's eyes altogether, just in case.

      Some of us don't agree with the necessity of that policy - but HubPages is a business. They're not providing this platform just so we can enjoy writing whatever we feel like because that doesn't work any more - they need to make a profit.  The old model stopped working some time ago and they have to make changes to survive.  That may not suit many of us, but it is their site and they're entitled to make those decisions.

      1. makingamark profile image65
        makingamarkposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        So explain to me why content is moved from HubPages after being unfeatured here and goes to live elsewhere and instantly gets a lot more traffic from Google - which is sustained and grows over time.

        It's not just me - it's a trend an awful lot of people have noticed. To my mind the only possible explanation is that
        (1) the HubPages mechanism for unfeaturing hubs is far too blunt and/or does not understand what Google wants to see
        (2) Google really hates HubPages

        1. Blake Flannery profile image96
          Blake Flanneryposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          Or, there's internal competition here that is getting the traffic for the keywords that you're targeting. When you move those hubs, you'll no longer have that internal competition.

        2. Marisa Wright profile image96
          Marisa Wrightposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          I'm not saying the mechanism they've chosen is a good one, just explaining why  they had to shift from the "we'll take whatever you write" philosophy.

          We all know unFeaturing is a clumsy weapon and HubPages itself has admitted it causes a lot of "collateral damage", but it's their business.

          1. makingamark profile image65
            makingamarkposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Agreed - the thing is when the collateral damage is too big you end up with no business.

            My business is to share content via sites which allow it to be seen and shared by Google.

      2. OldRoses profile image96
        OldRosesposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        So what are those of us who write seasonal hubs supposed to do?  My traffic is going to fluctuate widely depending on the time of year.  Does this mean that HP is no longer a good place to publish seasonal hubs?  Gardening is very popular topic.  I would think that HP would want these types of hubs but the reality is that with 75% of my hubs unfeatured due to low traffic because it's winter, I no longer feel welcome here despite the fact that I have been here 8 years, longer than most hubbers.

        1. TIMETRAVELER2 profile image100
          TIMETRAVELER2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

          I don't think you should feel that you are no longer welcome here.  I do think, however, that what is happening to you is a glitch in the system that needs to be addressed, and probably will be at some point.

          This is exactly why I feel that unfeaturing due to traffic is a mistake.  Too many people like you are getting hurt by this practice.

          In a few months Spring will arrive.  I would wait until then, make some minor updates and republish.  It's not the best answer, but may be the only one.

          1. Marisa Wright profile image96
            Marisa Wrightposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            If you leave a Hub unpublished for more than a week or so, Google will wipe the slate clean, forgetting all the good reputation and links and age it has built up. 

            I think the only solution for seasonal Hubs is to make a minor edit - just one sentence will do it - so it goes back through QAP and gets Featured again.  Keep doing that as necessary until the spring traffic picks up.   That way you can maintain it in Google's good books.

            It's not a strategy I suggest for evergreen Hubs but I can't see any other solution for seasonal ones.

            1. TIMETRAVELER2 profile image100
              TIMETRAVELER2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

              I was not aware of this.  Glad to know about it.  Thanks

            2. OldRoses profile image96
              OldRosesposted 2 years agoin reply to this

              Egads!  I have more than 50 hubs unfeatured.  I can't imagine having to update them over and over and over and over . . .

              1. Marisa Wright profile image96
                Marisa Wrightposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                Yes, that's why I don't recommend it UNLESS it's seasonal fluctuations that are causing the unFeaturing.  It is just an endless treadmill.

                I'm disappointed that HP hasn't discontinued the unFeaturing process because it has already fulfilled its original purpose (which was to hide all the old low-quality Hubs that hadn't gone through QAP).

            3. TIMETRAVELER2 profile image100
              TIMETRAVELER2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

              Marisa:

              Kristy Kerwin just said the exact opposite in another thread about this same topic.  I have asked her to clarify and am awaiting a response.

              1. Marisa Wright profile image96
                Marisa Wrightposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                Just checked Christy's post - she is not saying the exact opposite!

                What I'm saying is that if you have a Hub that's unFeatured for traffic, then you'd better get it re-Featured quick, or Google will de-index it.

                What Christy says is that if your Hub is unFeatured for engagement, then Google has ALREADY de-indexed it. 

                I have never heard anyone say that before.  In fact I'm sure I've heard people say not to panic about getting Hubs re-Featured again, because you've got a few days' grace before Google de-indexes. 

                The way to test it would be by Googling the exact title of a Hub that's been unFeatured in the last day or so.  If it doesn't come up, then the Hub is de-indexed already.

                1. TIMETRAVELER2 profile image100
                  TIMETRAVELER2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  Explain the difference between traffic and engagement.  I thought they were the same thing.

                  1. Marisa Wright profile image96
                    Marisa Wrightposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                    Everywhere else but HubPages, they mean two different things.  On HubPages, they mean exactly the same - sorry I should have stuck with the terminology you were using.

        2. Rock_nj profile image94
          Rock_njposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          When this whole unfeature thing started, HubPages reassured writers that seasonal Hubs would be treated differently, as they recognize that some are written for specific times of the year and will get little or no traffic other times of the year.  They obviously never programmed their system to account for seasonal Hubs.  A shame.  No need to upset good writers with poor design and programming.  You are not alone.  Many have left out of frustration with this policy.  I hope you stick around for another spring and your Hubs blossom once again.

      3. jackclee lm profile image81
        jackclee lmposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        Perhaps the solution is for HP not to focus so much on Google and go after other search engines. As popular as Google is today, there is no guarantee it will be here tomorrow. Good content is good content regardless who read it or who finds it because of SEO or key words or self promo... The current HP QAP is very primitive by AI standards. It is no match for a human being.

        1. Marisa Wright profile image96
          Marisa Wrightposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          The QAP is carried out entirely by human beings.  The unFeaturing for lack of traffic is done by an automated filter, but that is a separate thing.

          1. jackclee lm profile image81
            jackclee lmposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            I'm not so sure as you. The QAP seems pretty primitive. I can get all my hubs featured by just following a few basic steps. Besides, there are only a few staff at HP. They are not capable of reviewing all hubs for QAP. Just do the math.

            1. Kylyssa profile image97
              Kylyssaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

              Staff does not review the hubs in QAP. People on Amazon Turk perform QAP.

              I suggest people edit or publish highly technical, humorous, or creative writing hubs during the daytime if they live in the US to maximize their chances of getting Amazon Turkers whose native tongue is English.

              1. jackclee lm profile image81
                jackclee lmposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                Do you know how much time they spend on each hub? It seems it would take a long time to approve all the web pages being published daily.

                1. jackclee lm profile image81
                  jackclee lmposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                  kylyssa, I just performed a simple test and it appears there is no human reviewing QAP as I suspected. I created a hub this morning and the content have little to do with my title. This afternoon, the hub is featured with a hubscore of 62 and number of view of 6. You can read it for yourself. Would a human editor pass this quality test on my hub - "Ideal Debate Format" ?
                  You need to search for it or go to my home page. I can't link it here or risk being banned.

                  1. profile image0
                    calculus-geometryposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                    Great experiment, and you're right., unfortunately.  Hopefully I won't get banned if I link to your test hub
                    http://hubpages.com/politics/Ideal-Debate-Format

  8. paradigmsearch profile image89
    paradigmsearchposted 2 years ago

    Well, I guess I'm a minority opinion.

    Personally, I've always transferred my "zero" traffic hubs out of here long before HP would have gotten around to it.

    Why would anyone want to keep a "zero" traffic hub here anyway? Time and again I've seen posts from people who've transferred their nonperforming hubs elsewhere and then finally start getting the traffic that for whatever reason they couldn't get here.

    1. TIMETRAVELER2 profile image100
      TIMETRAVELER2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      paradigmsearch:

      I have always "caught" hubs that were failing before they ever went unfeatured and eventually deleted those that simply could not gain traffic.  However, most were worthy articles that, for whatever reason, did not bring good readership.

      Until today, I believed as you did...why keep a nonperforming article that nobody is reading?  The answer is in my initial post here.  The more informational hubs you have (good ones, of course) the higher the ratio overall of the site between the number of ads to information.

      Keeping your good articles  (especially if ad free), helps the entire site because as Marissa has said so many times, "Google likes bulk".  I never understood that statement until today.

      Many of those I rework eventually come back, and some even do pretty well.  I have never had a hub unfeatured due to traffic but know it would upset me if I did.

      1. paradigmsearch profile image89
        paradigmsearchposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        Think of your hubs as race horses, traffic of course representing how fast they run and how often they win, place, and show.

        I have a horse that just can't seem to perform well on this race track. Don't know why, but that horse can barely make it out of the gate, much less make it all the way around the track. And as for win, place, and show; forget it.

        Then the race track owner suddenly starts only allowing my horse to start races from gate 12. Needless to say, this only makes the horse perform even worse. This goes on for awhile...

        Then one night while I'm asleep, the race track owner takes my horse out of its stall and shoves him over the cliff next to the track.

        Time to find a new track.

        1. TIMETRAVELER2 profile image100
          TIMETRAVELER2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

          I see your point, but you are only talking in individual terms.  I am referring to both individual and site wide situations.

          Clearly, if you can make more money by moving your low performing hubs, you should do it, but not all of us use or have other options. 

          If you take the long view, keeping low traffic hubs does bolster the site, as long as those hubs are full of good, original content.  I've dumped many before they got to that point because looking at the low figures was upsetting and seemed fruitless.

          Google does not see these hubs if they are unfeatured, but they do if they remain featured.  This is why I think that, perhaps, the team should keep them online.

    2. MizBejabbers profile image92
      MizBejabbersposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      How do you writers have time to keep up with all the hubs you write? I have a full-time career position in editing, and during our busy season, I don't have time to keep up with my hubs. I had three hubs that were feeding off each other for traffic, and before I knew it, two were unfeatured, and probably de-indexed. I also find that poetry and short stories are a waste of time on HP. So, I guess I'll just stick to "How to clean your sink" or "What kind of cat litter is best" type hubs for simplicity. they seem to generate more traffic anyway.

      1. TIMETRAVELER2 profile image100
        TIMETRAVELER2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

        The easiest way I know to do this is to go to your stats page, click on your 30 day views and look to see if any hubs are getting really low views.  If so, update, change the title or do what you can to improve it.  Usually there aren't a ton of them, and if you catch them early, you can avoid problems.

      2. profile image0
        calculus-geometryposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        It takes literally less than five seconds to see which hubs are unfeatured, and I mean literally. Go to the drop down menu that says Select a Designation and pick Not Featured - Traffic.

        Or as TimeTraveler suggests you can sort them by number of views over the past 7 or 30 days, also a less-than-five-seconds operation.

      3. Marisa Wright profile image96
        Marisa Wrightposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        I agree the unFeaturing system is frustrating.   When I joined HubPages the process didn't exist, and the whole point of HubPages was that you wrote an evergreen article to the best of your ability, then just forgot about it (other than answering comments) for years.

        However as others have said, it doesn't have to be time-consuming. 

        Firstly, if you drop by twice a week and check your stats page (go to the drop down menu that says Select a Designation and pick Not Featured - Traffic), you'll catch any unFeatured articles before they have a chance to get de-indexed.

        Secondly, if a Hub is unFeatured for lack of traffic, then you really need to consider removing it from HubPages and moving it somewhere else.  There are plenty of sites - DailyTwoCents, Wizzley, WeekendNotes - which don't penalise for lack of traffic.  Those sites don't pay as well as HubPages - BUT if your Hub wasn't getting traffic, then it wasn't a money-earner anyway, so you'll be no worse off.

        Thirdly, poetry has never done well on HubPages or any other revenue-sharing site. You can improve your chances by combining several related poems into an "anthology" type Hub, or making the poem part of a larger article on a subject (Cardisa has a good Hub on how to do that).

  9. Mark Ewbie profile image87
    Mark Ewbieposted 2 years ago

    http://usercontent1.hubimg.com/12804188_f1024.jpg

  10. Vito Ren profile image66
    Vito Renposted 2 years ago

    score drops as in... punitive measure?? do you think they're that bad?

  11. Jodah profile image88
    Jodahposted 2 years ago

    I agree that HP should stop de-featuring hubs for low traffic and with all the points you made TT2. It is ok for some people who want to move their hubs to other places but I won't do that. I don't have the time or inclination. I have no hubs that are not featured at the moment but I am due for another batch to be hit I imagine. Currently a couple of my lower scoring hubs are getting me the most traffic and my editor's choice hubs are getting none (so I am sure these will suffer soon..they have in the past) It makes no sense to de-feature hubs that have been judged by HP as being good quality. Lack of quality or duplication should be the only criteria for de-featuring.

    1. TIMETRAVELER2 profile image100
      TIMETRAVELER2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      +1

      1. brakel2 profile image78
        brakel2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

        For a while, defeaturing for traffic stopped. I guess they only want high traffic hubs in their plan for the site now. +1

        1. TIMETRAVELER2 profile image100
          TIMETRAVELER2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

          I can understand why they would want that, but I hope they have not forgotten that it can take awhile for some hubs to gain momentum.  Today's low traffic hub has the potential of becoming tomorrows big seller.

          1. tsmog profile image81
            tsmogposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            1+ (for all concerned)

    2. Chriswillman90 profile image98
      Chriswillman90posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      100% agree! Good to excellent information is still very important even if traffic is lacking plus you never know when a sudden traffic spike may occur. The quality should always be the biggest factor regarding hubs and unfeaturing for quality is the only thing that makes sense to me.

  12. Shorebirdie profile image76
    Shorebirdieposted 2 years ago

    I definitely agree. I would say 2/3 of my hubs are unfeatured though their content is up to date and relevant.

  13. profile image0
    Snakesmumposted 2 years ago

    Having just had several hubs unfeatured for lack of traffic, I couldn't agree more.

    The hubs are quite long, and informational.  Currently, I'm working on them so that they become featured again, but only because they are on topics which don't fit into my websites.

    If hubs continue to be unfeatured for lack of traffic, then perhaps I'll rethink my attitude.

    1. DrMark1961 profile image99
      DrMark1961posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Why not look at it as an opportunity? You probably get close to no readers for "Black Swans" or "Rough Scaled Pythons" even though all of your hubs have a lot of good information in them. Try switching the titles to something people would be searching for.
      If you have pythons, you would probably look for "Tips on How to Care for Rough Scaled Pythons" or "Best Cages and Heat Sources for a Rough Scaled Python" but if you see "Rough Scaled Pythons" how do you even know it contains any of that information. A herper will probably just pass it up. I get decent traffic (not great) to my hub "Why a Tegu is the Best Pet Lizard" because it explains housing, feeding, etc. Definitely not more than your hubs do.
      There are a lot of good forum postings on writing titles to improve traffic. One of your fellow countrymen (Marisa Wright) has a lot of great suggestions on this topic so you can check her hubs and if nothing is available try sending her a mail.

      1. Marisa Wright profile image96
        Marisa Wrightposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        A very good point DrMark (and thanks for the mention!).   Titles are critical.

      2. profile image0
        Snakesmumposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        Hi DrMark1961,
        Thanks for your comments.   I shall take your advice and go and look at some of my titles at least, and see what I can do to improve them.   Usually, I try to put as much information as possible in a concise manner.

        Getting traffic is the hardest thing about writing on the internet!   Many of my articles were written for Squidoo, and had to be changed a lot for HP.

  14. C.V.Rajan profile image59
    C.V.Rajanposted 2 years ago

    I cannot agree more.

    HP's quality team should rather concentrate on contents that are outright bad, poorly written with bad English, intentionally stuffed and bloated with keywords etc (i.e. contents that are below the basic quality norms) and block them outright.  Otherwise, let the contents be there for whatever little traffic they may bring in. If the stuff is basically readable and useful, readers will read them anyway, irrespective of whether it has 3 photos, 5 sub-titles, a quiz, 4 text modules a couple of videos etc.

    C.V.

  15. LeanMan profile image86
    LeanManposted 2 years ago

    Un featuring due to low or no traffic in my mind is not a bad thing on a site like this...

    Firstly if you are not getting traffic from the search engines then you are not losing anything! So why are you worried? Your hub is still there, you still get traffic from pinterest, fb and all of those other wonderful places. You were not getting traffic from the search engines so removing the hub from their index will change nothing with regards to your traffic.

    Most pages will get a trickle of view right from the start if they have any chance of gaining traffic long term... there are few that will get no traffic for a year and then suddenly take off with hundreds of views.

    If you are not getting views it is down to one of the following:

    1. No one is searching for your subject or keywords
    2. There is too much competition from "better" niche sites off of HP
    3. There is too much competition within HP for the keywords that you have used

    So - if no one is searching for your keywords look at what keywords people are searching for around your subject area. If no one is every going to search for "My Cat's wonderful Christmas present" or "Why I love my purple pullover - a poem for my Granny" then just face the fact that no one is EVER going to search for your hub and that it makes no difference if you are in the Google index or not...

    If there are "better" sites offering pages targeting the same keywords then unfortunately they are likely to rank higher in the search engines than a page here at HP. So writing those medical and financial hubs targeting the highly trafficked keywords is a waste of time as the big boys have it sewn up. So if you can't beat the authority sites you need to create your own authority site and take on the big boys, not expect to rank from HP...

    Internal competition is a big problem - Google etc are only going to show 1 or 2 hubs in the search results for any specific keyword. So having 100 hubs here all targeting the exact same keywords is pointless - they will not all get traffic even if they are all fantastic. Having multiple hubs all targeting the same keywords is also a no-no as far as most of the SEO authorities will have us believe. So unfeaturing the hubs that Google sends no traffic to will "probably" help those that are receiving traffic for those keywords. HP I am sure have the data to answer if that is correct as they can see what is going on with the many thousands of pages that they have. The answer for those hubs that are suffering due to internal competition is either to target different keywords or to move them elsewhere to your own site with NO internal competition.

    So if you are getting un featured due to traffic don't just sit there are winge that it is unfair to your literary talents, do something about it. We provide what the search engines want and what the readers want - if we don't then - NO TRAFFIC... Unfair maybe - but that's the internet.

    1. Blake Flannery profile image96
      Blake Flanneryposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      If you want to move your stuff to your own site, how do you get HP to give you a redirect to your own site? Hubs that have had millions of views in the past have likely been copied quite a bit. How else would you avoid your new hub being viewed as a duplicate with a later published date?

      1. Marisa Wright profile image96
        Marisa Wrightposted 2 years agoin reply to this

        There is no way to get a redirect from HubPages unfortunately.   It's one reason I wouldn't move a Hub unless it was unFeatured, because you lose all the benefit of the Hub's reputation and age.   

        If you want to move work to your own site, then your first step should be to run the Hub through Copyscape to see whether it has been copied, and then submit DMCA's to get the copies taken down.  Only once you've done that, can you move it to your own site.

      2. DrMark1961 profile image99
        DrMark1961posted 2 years agoin reply to this

        I can only judge this program based on my own traffic, so I have to ask: Have you ever had a hub with millions of page views unfeatured for lack of traffic? It seems unlikely to me.

    2. TIMETRAVELER2 profile image100
      TIMETRAVELER2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      What you say makes sense in most cases, but for people like me, whose articles are mostly seasonal and are in one niche, unfeaturing means removing work that is part of a whole and also adds bulk in Google's eyes.

      Personally, I have only had this problem one time, and it was an easy fix, and although my "key words" mostly do center around one topic, I still get what I consider to be decent traffic.  I say this because I make payout every month and sometimes much more.

      When Spring arrives people thirst for the info I provide, so the more they see, the better my views.  Right now things are slow, but it would be upsetting to have hubs dropped off that I know will do well later.

      By the way, I always wondered how they figure traffic flow...is it per month or as the whole?  For example, if I have a hub that is getting fewer than 5 views in the off months, but overall has had hundreds or thousands of views...would they unfeature it?

  16. DzyMsLizzy profile image96
    DzyMsLizzyposted 2 years ago

    Personally, several of my hubs are unfeatured for lack of traffic, but as virtually all of those are poems, I'm not worried about it. 

    What gripes me most about that particular penalty though, is that HP seems so obsessed with traffic from  "The Big G," that they seem to overlook other things that are within their own parameters of what constitutes a quality hub, namely grammar and spelling.

    I have lost count of how many times I have read HOTDs which "feature" poor English, or hubs featured on HP's Face Book page that are barely readable, being filled with spelling and grammar errors.

    Why would HP feature those hubs in such a way?  Surely, that is not a good way to build site reputation and increase traffic! 

    Or has our educational system been 'dumbed-down' to that extent--that people can't even recognize poor writing as such, and swallow it whole without noticing?  What a travesty!

  17. Rock_nj profile image94
    Rock_njposted 2 years ago

    The unpopularity of this unfeaturing due to low traffic policy can be seen in the unending drop in published articles and writers on HubPages.  There is a Hub called "Google Attacks Our HubPages" that chronicles this long decline over the years.  It has really been brutal when you look at what HubPages once was.  2/3rds of the writers are gone, as are over half the published articles.

  18. paradigmsearch profile image89
    paradigmsearchposted 2 years ago

    https://i.imgflip.com/wq44y.jpg

    1. paradigmsearch profile image89
      paradigmsearchposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      20 hubs updated in the last 2 days. 20 kittens safe.

  19. Shadrack2 profile image46
    Shadrack2posted 2 years ago

    I agree totally.

  20. PaulGoodman67 profile image96
    PaulGoodman67posted 2 years ago

    It's a blunt tool, but like LeanMan, I believe it is a necessary one, given the site's history.  There are often reasons why a hub gets low traffic.  Remember that you are competing with the rest of the world for attention.  I have some stuff that does well and some that gets unfeatured for lack of traffic.  I take it on the chin and don't take it personally.  smile

    1. Will Apse profile image88
      Will Apseposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I mostly agree, except for very high quality pages which might find a place for themselves eventually. HP have QAP which seems fairly reliable. They could keep pages in the nineties for a few years.

      1. PaulGoodman67 profile image96
        PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this

        If someone has faith in their hub, they can make a minor edit two or three tims a year, that will keep it going, it doesn't seem that extreme to me.  I've done something similar at times.  Though generally if a hub is worth investing in,  there is much more than can be done, of course.  You either commit or let go.

        Personal blog type hubs about opinions on something are rarely successful in my opinion, in terms of traffic, but writers get upset when they don't get traffic or are taken out by HP.  They probably aren't harmful to HP either, of course, but they get eaten up anyway.

        The problem with relying on the QAP system is that it is labour intensive and therefore time-consuming and expensive.  To work, a hub would need to be assessed every time there is an edit or change by the hubber, and every time that Google alters its algo.  I can understand why HP seeks software shortcuts to lower costs.  There are tens of thousands of hubs, keeping the quality up continues to be a major challenge.

        As for moving hubs, that can work.  But if you are interested in earning some money for your writing, then HP ads are superior to Google Adsense.  You also may want to set up your own site(s) which gives you much more control and is more hassle, it's also more work and expense and requires more technical engagement, however.  If you aren't interested in earning, then there are lots of sites like Blogger, Wordpress.com and Facebook, you don't necessarily need HP.

        Some of the sites people moved their articles to in the past, places like Wizzley, Squidoo, and Bubblenews didn't work out so well.

        1. Marisa Wright profile image96
          Marisa Wrightposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          ... but Hubs ARE passed through QAP every time there is an edit or change by the Hubber.

          And in fact, unFeaturing for traffic means that happens more often, because a lot of Hubbers simply do a very small edit to send it back through QAP, which gets it Featured again.

          1. paradigmsearch profile image89
            paradigmsearchposted 2 years agoin reply to this

            Actually, I doubt that. I think some of us are trusted. Cost HP a fortune otherwise.

            1. PaulGoodman67 profile image96
              PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this

              @Marissa If my hubs go through QAP every time they are edited, then the process would appear to be instantaneous!   I edit stuff pretty much every single day!

              I think you're maybe confused with hubs going through QAP after they've been unfeatured, then edited for re-featuring?  Which wasn't what Will was talking about, as I understood?

              1. Kylyssa profile image97
                Kylyssaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

                Every time you edit hubs you'll see two views from Amazon Turk to each edited hub within approximately one day. So, yes, your hubs go through QAP with normal edits.

            2. TIMETRAVELER2 profile image100
              TIMETRAVELER2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

              I think you're correct about that because when I edit or post a new hub, it is featured within hours every time.  However, if the team is trusting some of us it is because we have proven time and again that we are careful about topic choices and produce grammatically correct and original content, etc.

              Why would someone who writes this way suddenly produce garbage?

              1. PaulGoodman67 profile image96
                PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this

                Spammers might write something reasonable to get through QAP, then add their own promotional crap.  (You obviously don't have a devious mind!)  smile

    2. Marisa Wright profile image96
      Marisa Wrightposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I can see why Hubs that haven't gone through QAP need to be subject to unFeaturing for traffic - BUT they have already all been unFeatured by now, after all it's been two years.

      So the question is, does HubPages have so little faith in the QAP that it feels it needs the safety net of unFeaturing for traffic?  Seems like an indictment on the QAP.

      1. PaulGoodman67 profile image96
        PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this

        There would be nothing to stop hubbers adding ad capsules, spam, poor quality content after the initial QAP, using routine editing, if HP followed your ideas.  Spammers would present a respectable hub initially, then add their crap post-QAP. 

        It would only be spotted through another hubber reporting it, even more stringent restrictions enforced by software, or extra rounds of QAP which don't currently exist.

        1. Marisa Wright profile image96
          Marisa Wrightposted 2 years agoin reply to this

          No, because I'm not suggesting they exempt existing Hubs from the QAP. 

          We have definitely been told that every time a Hub is edited, it is sent back through QAP.   If that is not the case then as you say, I would be worried - because as you say, even under the current system, Hubbers could add all kinds of rubbish to a Hub after it's been through its first scrutiny.

          Maybe some Hubbers are exempt but it would certainly be interesting to know what the situation is.

          1. PaulGoodman67 profile image96
            PaulGoodman67posted 2 years agoin reply to this

            I have eleven accounts and they all function the same.  The thread is about hubs being unfeatured due to lack of traffic, however, and you definitely get QAP'd after editing an unfeatured hub in my experience.  Can't tell you what the HP policy is for the rest. obviously, just my experiences...

            Let's be brutally honest too.  If your hub isn't getting views/traffic, nobody's reading it anyway, that's another reason why I'm not too upset about HP's policy on unfeaturing for lack of traffic!  smile

            Sometimes I edit unfeatured hubs and try to improve them.  Sometimes I delete them.  Sometimes I move them.  It's a personal judgement call.

  21. Kristen Howe profile image89
    Kristen Howeposted 2 years ago

    Not really, Marisa. It became featured again.  That was my quick fix, since it worked in the long run. I do continue to share for traffic and create new hubs. I'll check for grammar and punctuation for the next one to fix today, too. Jackclee, I do see the green box on my hub, when I edit it that it needs more words, though, sometimes.

    1. Marisa Wright profile image96
      Marisa Wrightposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Kristen, if you switch to "chronological" instead of "threaded" view for the forums, you'll find it easier to follow - I was responding to Jackclee, not you.

      If your Hub was good enough to pass QAP the first time and become Featured, then all it takes to get it reFeatured is a tiny edit - one or two words will do - because that will send it through QAP again, and since it was good enough last time it will be good enough this time.  Once it's approvied,, the traffic countdown will start afresh and you'll get another chance to get more traffic.

  22. Kristen Howe profile image89
    Kristen Howeposted 2 years ago

    Sorry Marissa.  I've gotten my wires crossed. LOL I hope you're right. BTW, Shelfari and Good Reads is merging next month and Shelfari will be no more. So I'll be changing widgets on my book review blog and replace my Shelfari widget one with Good Reads.  I hope to finally fix my book review blog this spring.

  23. Marisa Wright profile image96
    Marisa Wrightposted 2 years ago

    Why is HubPages so hung up on Google?  Because since the site began, about 90% of its traffic has come from Google. 

    You yourself have suggested that the scrutiny before a Hub is Featured is flawed, so the unFeaturing for traffic is a safety net in that case.

 
working

This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis 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.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe 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 PixelsWe 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.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
https://hubpages.com/community/forum/134565/team-hp--stop-unfeaturing-for-trafficplease
hubpages.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2018-43
313253
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:JL433SMM77OQCP5MA434A6UXF4VUAHCG
<urn:uuid:c8b90922-1605-40fe-9a5c-731a5ea29a4d>
2018-10-23T11:41:04Z
34.196.66.78
text/html
sha1:6KDDFNIPH63R3OWW3OG4GDGQOJZJSZK6
<urn:uuid:dce6662b-1bb3-4d0a-b28c-3bd45f1c76ff>
https://hubpages.com/community/forum/134565/team-hp--stop-unfeaturing-for-trafficplease
response
<urn:uuid:5e748c32-d1ee-4523-95b3-78e64a9f3229>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2018-43
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for October 2018
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-102-177-5.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.15 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 0.11-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/