SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 127
  1. #101
    Error 404: Life not found silver trophybronze trophy
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    UK Nr Manchester
    Posts
    3,460
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by junjun View Post
    I don't want to sound too generic, but if you create content that humans want to read, the search engines will follow.
    And in text written for humans by humans, the range of use for the main word/phrase which most represents the subject matter is usually between 2-4%.

    If you deliberately exceed that percentage in an attempt to manipulate the search engines, you risk a keyword stuffing penalty.

    So..... you could argue that my 2-4% or 3.5% or whatever, is just my way of making sure my text content reads naturally and that I don't accidentally incur penalties when I'm using keyword placement to ensure the search engines focus on the keyword phrase that I want them to focus on.
    It's 530 people, but do you really get it?
    ImgWebDesign - Web design in Buxton, High Peak, Derbyshire UK.

  2. #102
    SitePoint Zealot jvr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by stymiee View Post
    Because what you just said contradicts what's been said in this thread. That's why.
    I don't know what's wrong with you people, I just post a comment about keyword density and that's it. I thought it will help somehow, but its your opinion.

  3. #103
    He's No Good To Me Dead silver trophybronze trophy stymiee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Slave I
    Posts
    23,426
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jvr View Post
    I don't know what's wrong with you people, I just post a comment about keyword density and that's it. I thought it will help somehow, but its your opinion.
    Basically you contradicted what most people had argued in this thread, especially by offering a percentage to shoot for, and offered nothing of substance to back it up. It shows you didn't bother to read the thread which isn't looked upon favorably. Good netiquette would have had you read the entire thread first and then post a response within the context of what has already been discussed.

  4. #104
    He's No Good To Me Dead silver trophybronze trophy stymiee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Slave I
    Posts
    23,426
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JJMcClure View Post
    Actually it doesn't, it just contradicts you.
    Actually it contradicts the members who have been in this SEO forum for a long time and proven their SEO knowledge.

    Quote Originally Posted by JJMcClure View Post
    And in text written for humans by humans, the range of use for the main word/phrase which most represents the subject matter is usually between 2-4%.

    If you deliberately exceed that percentage in an attempt to manipulate the search engines, you risk a keyword stuffing penalty.

    So..... you could argue that my 2-4% or 3.5% or whatever, is just my way of making sure my text content reads naturally and that I don't accidentally incur penalties when I'm using keyword placement to ensure the search engines focus on the keyword phrase that I want them to focus on.
    That number is still arbitrary and doesn't even address the fact that if their is such a thing as keyword density it isn't going to be a flat percentage but rather fluctuate depending on multiple factors. That's why you can't shoot for any particular percentage. You're only aiming for a made up number.

  5. #105
    Object Not Found junjun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    northern MI
    Posts
    1,392
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jvr View Post
    I don't know what's wrong with you people, I just post a comment about keyword density and that's it. I thought it will help somehow, but its your opinion.
    Nothing wrong with anyone, Stymiee just pointed out that that we've actually talked about the myth/concept of keyword density earlier in this thread. This is a friendly forum, let's keep it that way

    EDIT: Oops didn't see Stymiees reply while I wrote this reply.

  6. #106
    SitePoint Zealot jvr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by stymiee View Post
    Basically you contradicted what most people had argued in this thread, especially by offering a percentage to shoot for, and offered nothing of substance to back it up. It shows you didn't bother to read the thread which isn't looked upon favorably. Good netiquette would have had you read the entire thread first and then post a response within the context of what has already been discussed.
    Actually, I'm an SEO student, and based on my research, It's 2-4%. That's it. As simple as that...

  7. #107
    He's No Good To Me Dead silver trophybronze trophy stymiee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Slave I
    Posts
    23,426
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jvr View Post
    Actually, I'm an SEO student, and based on my research, It's 2-4%. That's it. As simple as that...
    And if you read this thread you can see why that number isn't accurate.

  8. #108
    SitePoint Evangelist
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    516
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The admin needs to close this thread before someone gets hurt

    Obviously, if you don't have any of the keywords in your copy, you will not rank for those keywords because no search engine can read your mind alone . As far as putting a number to it, I'm not sure if I agree. If you are writing on a topic, the keywords will naturally go into the copy. If it works out to 2-4 % that's great. I certainly would not keep a calculator handy.
    godaycare.com - Canadian daycare listings with reviews
    Parenting and Child care Forum - Canadian child care forum

  9. #109
    SitePoint Zealot jvr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    198
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by stymiee View Post
    And if you read this thread you can see why that number isn't accurate.
    I'm not saying that it is accurate, what I'm trying to say is that for BASIS. Isn't ok if you will look that number as a basis for your keyword density? Of course, not everybody will agree to that.

  10. #110
    SitePoint Evangelist
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    516
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think what you are trying to say is that statistically, based on research of human speech patterms, when you talk on a topic, your keyword density is around 2-4%. In that case, it would make sense for google to 'losely" use those numbers as an indicator of the quality of the copy.
    godaycare.com - Canadian daycare listings with reviews
    Parenting and Child care Forum - Canadian child care forum

  11. #111
    Non-Member Icheb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,474
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jvr View Post
    Actually, I'm an SEO student, and based on my research, It's 2-4%. That's it. As simple as that...
    SEO student

  12. #112
    Error 404: Life not found silver trophybronze trophy
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    UK Nr Manchester
    Posts
    3,460
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by stymiee View Post
    Actually it contradicts the members who have been in this SEO forum for a long time and proven their SEO knowledge.
    I'm sure it does, but you didn't say that, you said it contradicted what's been said in this thread. It doesn't, since both sides have been argued.

    It does however contradict what's been said by people who don't agree that keyword density is an issue. Lets not give the wrong impression with inaccurate replies.

    I don't know how many times I have to say that I'm not 'aiming' for a number, you're just not getting that bit. It's like you stop reading as soon as you see the phrase 'keyword density' and a percentage.

    Jvr, can you post some of your research?
    It's 530 people, but do you really get it?
    ImgWebDesign - Web design in Buxton, High Peak, Derbyshire UK.

  13. #113
    Error 404: Life not found silver trophybronze trophy
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    UK Nr Manchester
    Posts
    3,460
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Icheb View Post
    SEO student
    Aren't we all?

    Don't stoop to ridicule, it's beneath this forum.
    It's 530 people, but do you really get it?
    ImgWebDesign - Web design in Buxton, High Peak, Derbyshire UK.

  14. #114
    He's No Good To Me Dead silver trophybronze trophy stymiee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Slave I
    Posts
    23,426
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JJMcClure View Post
    I'm sure it does, but you didn't say that, you said it contradicted what's been said in this thread. It doesn't, since both sides have been argued.

    It does however contradict what's been said by people who don't agree that keyword density is an issue. Lets not give the wrong impression with inaccurate replies.

    I don't know how many times I have to say that I'm not 'aiming' for a number, you're just not getting that bit. It's like you stop reading as soon as you see the phrase 'keyword density' and a percentage.
    Sorry, but the members who have proven themselves in this forum over the long haul simply carry more weight then members who waltz in here and decide they're going to provide contradictory information on a whim. Maybe I should have said, "you contradicted everyone who has provided a valid explanation of why keyword density is a red herring and didn't provide anything resembling a logical explanation"?

  15. #115
    Word Painter silver trophy Shyflower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Winona, MN USA
    Posts
    10,053
    Mentioned
    142 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Actually, this percentage thing is quite interesting. Tell me how you calculate a long-tail keyword phrase? Say three words long. Are you considering it as one "keyword"?

    The search engines will look at it as three. Put a three word phrase into Google and you'll find your words listed singly, as a two word phrase, and as a three word phrase. Which is the percentage you're targeting?

    Nearly every single "Keyword Density Tool" on the web calculates keywords differently. Some include stop words. Some calculate single words and some calculate several words. Which is your tool of choice?

    Certainly calculating keyword phrases isn't done for your readers. Putting a percentage on keywords is only a way to manipulate search engines. In that case, it's a definite "no" as far as Google is concerned since any attempt to manipulate Google will result in penalties if found out.
    Linda Jenkinson
    "Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean." ~Unknown

  16. #116
    Error 404: Life not found silver trophybronze trophy
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    UK Nr Manchester
    Posts
    3,460
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by stymiee View Post
    Maybe I should have said, "you contradicted everyone who has provided a valid explanation of why keyword density is a red herring and didn't provide anything resembling a logical explanation"?
    Yes you should have. What you actually said gave a completely different and misleading impression to new members.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shyflower View Post
    Which is the percentage you're targeting?
    Sigh....

    For the umpteenth zumpteenth whumpteenth time, I'm not targeting a percentage nor recommending that anyone else does.

    I don't understand why you guys keep missing my point, it's really not that hard to understand or am I explaining it really badly?
    It's 530 people, but do you really get it?
    ImgWebDesign - Web design in Buxton, High Peak, Derbyshire UK.

  17. #117
    Word Painter silver trophy Shyflower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Winona, MN USA
    Posts
    10,053
    Mentioned
    142 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JJMcClure View Post
    Yes you should have. What you actually said gave a completely different and misleading impression to new members.



    Sigh....

    For the umpteenth zumpteenth whumpteenth time, I'm not targeting a percentage nor recommending that anyone else does.

    I don't understand why you guys keep missing my point, it's really not that hard to understand or am I explaining it really badly?

    Sorry JJ... that wasn't directed to you. It was directed towards anyone who thinks they know how to calculate keyword density. You've proven in this thread that you are willing to listen to both sides of the case and make your judgment accordingly.
    Linda Jenkinson
    "Say what you mean. Mean what you say. But don't say it mean." ~Unknown

  18. #118
    Object Not Found junjun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    northern MI
    Posts
    1,392
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Shyflower View Post
    Certainly calculating keyword phrases isn't done for your readers.
    Right on!
    Example to show how ludicrous the idea about Keyword Density as part a search engine algo is, let's say we have a page with only the text "Shyflower makes websites". The Keyword Density is 33.34%.. and that proves what?
    Dr. Garcia (from ccswhiz' link) mathematically proves why keyword density cannot be part of any modern search engine algo, because it simply does not help in proving relevancy. SEO experts like Dan Thies agrees.
    It's time for this myth to die.

  19. #119
    Error 404: Life not found silver trophybronze trophy
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    UK Nr Manchester
    Posts
    3,460
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by junjun View Post
    Right on!
    Example to show how ludicrous the idea about Keyword Density as part a search engine algo is, let's say we have a page with only the text "Shyflower makes websites". The Keyword Density is 33.34%.. and that proves what?
    Dr. Garcia (from ccswhiz' link) mathematically proves why keyword density cannot be part of any modern search engine algo, because it simply does not help in proving relevancy. SEO experts like Dan Thies agrees.
    It's time for this myth to die.
    It proves nothing, you're right.

    As I've said several times, I think keyword density is only a factor if you over-optimise in conjunction with the keyword placement.

    If you had a page that only had on it 1000 instances of the name Marylin Munroe in the text, we both know that it wouldn't do well because Google would know that it's not a useful page for human visitors. But would it get penalised?

    I think that it's more likely to get penalised if the same keyword phrase also appears in all the important places, indicating a deliberate attempt to manipulate the search engines.
    Last edited by JJMcClure; Dec 29, 2007 at 07:00.
    It's 530 people, but do you really get it?
    ImgWebDesign - Web design in Buxton, High Peak, Derbyshire UK.

  20. #120
    SitePoint Evangelist
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    516
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by junjun View Post
    let's say we have a page with only the text "Shyflower makes websites". The Keyword Density is 33.34%.. and that proves what?
    What that proves is that you are not aware of statistical probability. Google will not use their algoryths on a small chunk of text. If you have that little text to offer, you will be joining the MFA's shortly. Google does analysis on a decent sample of copy. It's the only way it can determine accurately what the page is about. I'm no guru or anything, but it seems only logical.
    godaycare.com - Canadian daycare listings with reviews
    Parenting and Child care Forum - Canadian child care forum

  21. #121
    Object Not Found junjun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    northern MI
    Posts
    1,392
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by JJMcClure View Post
    As I've said several times, I think keyword density is only a factor if you over-optimise in conjunction with the keyword placement.
    If keyword density is not relevant, there won't be any 'penalty'. Googles algo already has things in place to determine document relevancy, so why use factors that are not related to it? I've seen nothing reliable to support this belief. On the contrary.
    In the field of SEO there are conflicting view going on all the time, but the minimal requirement is to go beyond the "I think this is true" without backing it up with anything else (such as tests, logic, even experience). There are examples of #1 results in Google with pages of 90-100% keyword density.

    Quote Originally Posted by JJMcClure View Post
    If you had a page that only had on it 1000 instances of the name Marylin Munroe in the text, we both know that it wouldn't do well because Google would know that it's not a useful page for human visitors. But would it get penalised?
    We almost agree here I would think it would be probable that it would not do good based on Googles regular determination of relevancy, which does not include keyword density. There are pages similar to the ones you describe above that does rank #1 on it's own phrase. I think maybe your belief about the penalty comes from what you think makes more sense (or maybe from reading what some people say about keyword density), and not from any observations/tests/examples.

    Quote Originally Posted by LauraDC View Post
    What that proves is that you are not aware of statistical probability.
    I've actually studied statistics, albeit 10 years ago, but I don't think it's relevant It does prove that I was not able to get my point across, but see below for better example.

    Quote Originally Posted by LauraDC View Post
    Google does analysis on a decent sample of copy. It's the only way it can determine accurately what the page is about. I'm no guru or anything, but it seems only logical.
    A page with 500 words and another with 2000 words can have the same keyword density. Again it helps nothing in determining which document is more relevant. It does not take into consideration where the words occur in the document or their context. Click the Garcia link provided earlier in this text.

  22. #122
    SitePoint Evangelist
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    516
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by junjun View Post
    It does not take into consideration where the words occur in the document or their context. Click the Garcia link provided earlier in this text.
    This is actually interesting. I was not aware that placing keywords at certain spots on the page had an effect on SEO. Care to elaborate further on this? I know that placing keywords near the top had some effect, just don't know how much.

    I think we should not speak of density, but rather speech patterns. When we speak on topic, keywords will flow naturally into the copy. It's only when we try too hard, will we overuse the keywords. That's what google is monitoring.
    godaycare.com - Canadian daycare listings with reviews
    Parenting and Child care Forum - Canadian child care forum

  23. #123
    Object Not Found junjun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    northern MI
    Posts
    1,392
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by LauraDC View Post
    This is actually interesting. I was not aware that placing keywords at certain spots on the page had an effect on SEO. Care to elaborate further on this?
    Matching and groupings is a way to find context in information retriaval. Google has been working on this (maybe working on it, we can't know for sure), since at least 2004. See this video where a Google rep is explaining. http://www.uwtv.org/programs/displayevent.aspx?rID=3898
    Matt Cutts have been describing something similar as Latent Semantic indexing.
    Again, this is not something you need to pay much attention to in SEO. Just make sure you normal sentences and Google will figure out the rest. If you want to SEO your text with respect to theming, make sure you structure your content in themes, and make sure there's additional keywords present that are connected to the theme. I guess... I've never optimized content this way, and I don't think it's needed if your regular content for users is good enough.

  24. #124
    Non-Member Waraas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Idaho Falls, Idaho
    Posts
    350
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I dont even think that if you had a keyword 15 times would help your ranking in the serps compaired to 5 times on a page.

    I personally dont care about this thing called "keyword density" at all. Just slap your keyword in your title tag, h1 tag, and then a few times in your content and you will be fine

    If you are worried about putting your keyword in 10 1/2% of your content than you have spent too much time doing math

    Im joking, but bkcook... i know we have said it a bunch, just focus on your quality content and your link building

  25. #125
    SitePoint Evangelist
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    516
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Agreed. After 5 pages we finally know the truth
    godaycare.com - Canadian daycare listings with reviews
    Parenting and Child care Forum - Canadian child care forum


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •