Talk:HubPages: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 21:10, 14 January 2014

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Internet Low‑importance

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Websites: Computing

	This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Companies

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

a7 Notability and Importance

I see there's some past, but let's look at the present situation:

HubPages is mentioned by relevant Internet sources to an extent that makes it notable -Mashables -TechCrunch -Quantcast

HubPages gets a lot of traffic (over 6,000,000 unique views/month)

Hubpages is the first site to integrate Google AdSense API to share revenue with writers

HubPages has a lot of content -with nearly 100,000 individual hubs. -and an average of 67 visitors/hub/month.

HubPages is at least as notable as Squidoo -Relatively equal traffic -Much higher traffic on a per hub basis mroconnell (talk) 01:07, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hubpages was selected as one of two case studies for Google's AdSense API (the other site was Blogger) http://code.google.com/apis/adsense/hubpages.html mroconnell (talk) 02:23, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

---

Updated the Google Adsense link since the previous link was bad.

In spite of my criticism below that I think hubpages is a scam (which has nothing to do with notability), I would agree that HubPages is solidly notably. Here's a Washington Post article about it: [1]. Here's another article: [2]. Cazort (talk) 15:29, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removed edits referenced above can be seen here. Flowanda | Talk 22:15, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removed competitor section (January 2011)

I removed the competitor section because it was unsourced POV. Similar companies can be viewed by clicking one of the categories at the end of the article, which will provide more up-to-date listings of other websites or companies. Criticisms (as well as praise, etc.) of the company should be sourced to news reporting from sources meeting WP:RS. Flowanda | Talk 22:24, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hubpages seems to be spammy wasteland of poorly written articles similar to what you would see on a cyber squatter's page of loosely related links. Couldn't there be some mention of this on the wikipedia entry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.97.118.2 (talk) 03:59, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested edits

It is requested that an edit be made to the semi-protected article at HubPages. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)

This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".

The edit may be made by any autoconfirmed user. Remember to change the |answered=no parameter to "yes" when the request has been accepted, rejected or on hold awaiting user input. This is so that inactive or completed requests don't needlessly fill up the edit requests category. You may also wish to use the {{ESp}} template in the response. To request that a page be protected or unprotected, make a protection request.

I'd like to make a few corrections to the current page.

"HubPages is a user generated content, revenue-sharing website." should be: HubPages is a writing platform and revenue-sharing website with a focus on long format, media-rich articles.

In the Structure section:

“...(usually 400 to 1,500 words)” should be: (usually 700 to 1,500 words)

“...by a 50/50 split with publishers.” should be: by a 40/60 split with 60% to the publishers.

38.111.148.243 (talk) 23:35, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As to the first edit, what is the difference between " a user generated content ... website" and "a writing platform" and can you supply a source that supports this proposed change?

For the second proposed edit (to the structure section, again can you provide a source that supports this change? DES ^(talk) 20:24, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a more neutral phrase we could use other than "media-rich", which sounds awfully "talking point-y" to me? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:48, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm being prohibited to link to HubPages FAQ to cite my sources. Is there some way to fix this? 38.111.148.243 (talk) 21:10, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 20:48, 14 January 2014 edit Cyphoidbomb (talk \| contribs) Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users 166,474 edits →Requested edits: reply ← Previous edit		Revision as of 21:10, 14 January 2014 edit undo 38.111.148.243 (talk) →Requested edits Next edit →
Line 61:		Line 61:

	:Is there a more neutral phrase we could use other than "media-rich", which sounds awfully "talking point-y" to me? [[User:Cyphoidbomb\|Cyphoidbomb]] ([[User talk:Cyphoidbomb\|talk]]) 20:48, 14 January 2014 (UTC)		:Is there a more neutral phrase we could use other than "media-rich", which sounds awfully "talking point-y" to me? [[User:Cyphoidbomb\|Cyphoidbomb]] ([[User talk:Cyphoidbomb\|talk]]) 20:48, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

			I'm being prohibited to link to HubPages FAQ to cite my sources. Is there some way to fix this? [[Special:Contributions/38.111.148.243\|38.111.148.243]] ([[User talk:38.111.148.243\|talk]]) 21:10, 14 January 2014 (UTC)