Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 18.104.22.168
Had to say it... No thanks from me! A day was there when I spread the G word like everyone else, now whenever I talk I talk with extreme anguish.
I joined the Adsense program back in June 2004. . . My site was pretty small back then . . .
14,000 pages of unique, rich, densely cross-linked content
Let's say a reasonable person would call a site of <500 pages "small".
So, 13,500 pages of "unique, rich, densely cross-linked content" added in 5.5 years since June 2004:
Success stories are inspirational but a clear understanding of what it may take to be successful if often missing in web-based inspirational stories.
7 unique, rich articles a day, every day, every year is not humanly possible for most human beings. Add to that output that you manage to have lots of time for travel, gigging, etc. (Also, no mention of time devoted to "other employment", so gauging the output I assume you're a full time Web publisher.)
I'll assume that, lacking specific evidence to independently judge "uniqueness + richness", that all 13,500 articles/pages are of varying degrees of uniqueness and richness. Assuming a minimum time 1 hour for research, drafts/editing, crafting a good title and having time for crafting inter-article links - to 1000s of unique and rich articles = WOW. That's subject matter genius (exceptional command, required to judge quality/utility) + search/research genius (query skill, fast reading/absorbion/processing) + copy writing/editing skills + superior typing speed.
My hat is off to you for being so consistently productive. I can think of few humans could match your output of unique, rich content, especially in the field of science publishing.
I'm married to a microbiologist with an advanced degree, have a son who's an analytical chemist and I practice law, so I have some idea of the time demands for producing quality technical writing. This publisher's output is beyond extraordinary . . so don't get your hopes up too high. :P
I'm not certain qualified technical writers/scientists would be lining up to submit quality work to a site that pastes a large Adsense box ahead of the fruits of the scientist/author's labor. Possible but, as professional-scientist behavior goes, doubtful. Science authors, submitting to a peer review site? A respected science journal's site, for a fee or for the peer-esteem that attaches to such a publication? Possibly. Perhaps the OP is of such great repute that scientists around the world clamor to have their writings approved and added to his/her site?
A forum or UGC? Frankly, it would be quite something to have such a unique, quality content forum that can "get along with" this approach:
I work on the site a few hours a day, or whenever I feel like it.
Again, the success in the case of a forum or other version of UGC site would be extraordinary. A site, such as WebmasterWorld, relies upon the efforts of dozens of volunteer moderators and administrators, plus a paid staff, to uphold any degree of spam-free valuable content. This 1 section of WebmasterWorld alone has 3 moderators and the OP's "site" apparently has an equal number of specialty sections. There is no mention of the efforts of volunteer moderators, etc.
My point is, whatever the site actually is, the results by any measure I can infer might apply are beyond exceptional. Kudos to the OP. Such genius is rare. My praise is almost as great as my envy for this degree of talent and genius. Even with my best efforts, and the help of several others, I wouldn't be able to replicate his/her success. The OP's success is the stuff of legend.
I had a bad Friday mainly because I have a single .info site [webmasterworld.com] which was laid low by what seems like a (thankly short-lived) google glitch which affected .infos and blogspots.
$80K-$90,000/year derived off a single .info site?
We have now moved into a realm beyond legend and into the pantheon of Web publishing deities. Now I am inspired. Thank you astrobiologist.
sitting in front of a keyboard pecking out page after page isn't the only way to build a site full of decent quality content.
Building 14,000 pages of reasonable, even high quality content over several years doesn't seem at all unreasonable to me.
All the more remarkable is this factoid, in the OP's historical posting record: I had a bad Friday mainly because I have a single .info site which was laid low by what seems like a (thankly short-lived) google glitch which affected .infos and blogspots.
That was a one or two day glitch in Google which I think dropped every single .info and blogspot site in their index and freaked out many web publishers across the Internet.
My point is, whatever the site actually is, the results by any measure I can infer might apply are beyond exceptional.
I was wondering how the OP got all of those pages as well with working so little hours on his site. Are they images? Pre-existing catalogued data pages?
The site actually doesn't make much per page per day. The only thing exceptional is the number of pages which is why the total income is decent. If you have a site that averages a dollar a day per page you can make the same income with a tiny fraction of the pages the OP has in his site.