Related Keyword Stuffing

[trickobrien]

They seem to be fair game,I just wonder how much weight is really applied to their presence.

 

[Satanta]

They seem to be fair game,I just wonder how much weight is really applied to their presence.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'fair game'. If you're stuffing keywords (either directly, synonyms or semantically related) you're simply greatly increasing the risks of tripping one of the algo's and getting badly burnt. In terms of risk/reward it's a terrible decision. As for 'whats acceptable', it will vary from site to site as it's benchmarked against similar sites to deem what is acceptable or appropriate in a given industry/niche.

 

[trickobrien]

I have seen the results of related keyword stuffing,and it seems to have had no ill effect for the user,the opposite actually.Micro sites with very little content beating authority sites.Its basically exploiting the latent semantic indexing algo,which seems to conflict with the general consensus of levels of keywords or related keyword use.

 

[Satanta]

...which seems to conflict with the general consensus of levels of keywords or related keyword use.

What consensus? It's a dynamic threshold related to benchmarking against similar sites.

The only consensus I'm aware of is to write for users and not waste time trying to game the algo. Focusing on providing genuinely great content to achieve far superior results from delighted users seems a much better solution with far more sustainable results, especially in the long term as google continue on their current push to clean up the SERPs. It wouldn't actually take that much additional work to achieve relative to constantly monitoring and tracking dynamic triggers.

 

[trickobrien]

The consensus I was referring to is the use of between 1 and 4 percent keyword density,which I always go by myself.But I do like testing the boundaries sometimes,just to see the search engines response LOL.I see text on most sites as just sales copy,to be scanned over as quickly as possible,but maybe thats just me.

 

[mneylon]

Keyword stuffing *might* work in the short term, but it won't work in the long term
You should be producing content for users NOT bots

 

[CelticJim]

never even heard of keyword stuffing before----cookie stuffing yes.So much to learn

 

[mneylon]

never even heard of keyword stuffing before----cookie stuffing yes.So much to learn

Here you go: Keyword stuffing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nowadays it's done in the body of the page - sometimes it's visible, sometimes it's hidden using either CSS trickery or dodgy colours

Not to be confused with a lot of ethical techniques that sites use to increase the keyword density and importance etc.,

The basic difference is one of ethics.

 

[CelticJim]

wiki suggests the technique is outdated then.

always best to stick with whitehat and relevant content however I see nothing wrong with trying to game the system a little bit with some greyhat tricks as long as you are providing unique content and relevancy.

 

[trickobrien]

Keyword in title tags and mentioned in post body (especially on a high PR/Backlinks site)works like magic

http://www.irishwebmasterforum.com/cms-and-content-management/13433-free-wordpress-themes.html
That thread ranked on the first page of Google.ie within 3 hours for its respective keyword

If related keywords had been used,would that thread rank for those related keywords also? or would Google just decide that in weighing up relevancy,the page using the most related keywords should occupy top position on first page.(assuming equal PR and backlinks)

 

[link8r]

Well, in fairness "Free Wordpress Themes" is hardly keyword stuffing.