Page 5 - The Sticky for Meta Description, keywords, keyword density, and title tags

All the meta tags are important, athought some people said only title is important, but it can take few minutes to make your description well, which would help your sarps in search engine.Keyword is now weaken, but still need to write it well.

Well I read your quote and followed your link and read that post as well.... I have to say that there is some good advice in the post, but I disagree with many of the points made.

I think that many people in SEO get tired of the same arguments, so they make blanket statements to end the discussion, which can mislead many people who do not know any better.

To all the people new to SEO I have to say that there are probably bigger problems with your website and SEO tactics than keyword density, but that a high density will have a negative effect on your SERPs (it's called keyword stuffing).

In fact the author of the other post admits this importance himself when he talks about diluting the relevancy of your keywords within your title by adding to many other terms... that is keyword density. There is also the keyword density tool right here at SEOchat, which would be kinda useless if keyword density does not matter at all.

Another mistake I have seen people make is to assume that if a website that has poor density ranks well, this means that density does not matter... there can be many factor causing this such as semantics and off-page factors. The bottom line is... density is a factor, just not the only or most important factor.

The fact that SEOChat has a tool for this doesn't mean much. There was a demand for such a tool long ago, so they made one

And yes, density is indeed important in some way, but still there is no fixed ideal percentage - a belief that lots of people don't seem to be able to let go.

But yeah. Good points.

Refuted by...





The thing is no one said "KEYWORDS" weren't important (that's your claim that we claim)... we claim that you can't have a density if you don't measure and in measuring you will find "all densities" work equally well.



I hope you understand... SEOCHat members are not SEOChat owners.



OK let us assume for the moment you are correct... "what is the perfect density?

Try this...

They say "coffee is good for you"... GREAT I love coffee... but 2 1/2 years ago it caused my heart attack... because I believed that "coffee is good for you"... and I drank 11 pots a day (every day) or about 110 cups.

Red wines is also "good for you"... but not if you're an alcoholic.

These analogies are exactly the same as your advice is saying "keyword density" is good for rankings (e.g. a ranking factor)... because just any old density?

You've adviced that "keyword stuffing" is bad and thereforte suggest a high density is bad... but if a single word is on the page (thus 100% keyword density) is this keyword stuffing?

...and if 1 word is keyword stuffing (according to you) how can you use keyword density at all?

MY point is - you're not commiting to offering anyone "useful" advice... you're merely talking out your *** and being one of those people that "many people in SEO get tired of the same arguments, so they make blanket statements to end the discussion, which can mislead many people who do not know any better."

Anyone that claims keyword density is useful but can't spill exacting details on what density is the best... and show examples... is an SEO moron.

I don't want this to spiral into a "you said" - "you said" kinda thing, but you have both misunderstood and miss-quoted me, and regardless... my comments were not directed at you or at the forum, but at the blanket statement that... keyword density makes no difference at whatsoever!

I never said that anyone else said keywords weren't important and I am not interested with arguing with anyone, but simply having an intelligent discussion with my peers.

I never said SEO was simply a matter of density, it is much more complicated than any single factor...

I don't drink coffee, but if I did... I think I would listen to someone that told me to drink it in moderation, even if they did not hold my hand and tell me exactly how many cups to drink... I think I would have enough common sense to understand that 1, 2, 3 cups might be OK... but 20 cups would make me puke my guts out!

The bottom line is that these silly arguments and insults are beneath us, if you are anything like me, then you are a very busy professional with an interest in sharing knowledge and interfacing with other professionals.

You say that I am not committing to offering anyone "useful" advice... " I say... I am committed to having a mature discussion on this topic with those interested doing so. I am interested in your research and experiences.If you have some official Google statements or your research that proves it does not matter if you use your keyword 1 time or 500 times in a web page, then I want to hear what you have to say... if not then lets do this research.. but let's answer the questions and solve the problems... not argue and insult one another.

CORRECT!

If you disagree and think it matters... let's put it to the test...

What density works best?

Answer that... and I'll show you why it's wrong.

OK... Just answer one question for me first... How many backlinks does it take to rank number 1 in the SERPs for my Keyword?

This thread isn't about backlinks... and your disagreeable advice never noted backlink either... seems a little unfair to conveniently ignore my question in favor of "changing the topic".

Didn't you just say this?



Please stop "misleading people"...

What density works best?

I think you are missing the point...

I was just trying to make you realize that your question was just like that question...

There is no single "Perfect Keyword Density" just like there is no perfect amount of backlinks to make you rank for a keyword.

Lets get serious now and stop "poking each other with a stick", we both know that there are hundreds of factors that are used to determine search results and that Google does not share the exact details with anyone... No one factor determines anything, why can't you just admit that keyword density is one of these factors....

...and so if you consider

1. add keyword to title element <title></title> (a major on-page factor)

2. add keyword to page title in H1 to H6 header elements (a fairly good on-page factor)

That naturally has a keyword density of whatever but not because you invested any time considering keyword density... right?

3. Write a page of content - normally it will have the keyword in it for which the page is about... and again you don't need to consider keyword density... (this naturally has a keyword density of whatever but not because you invested any time considering keyword density... and as an on-page factor this cannot compete with the other 2 on-page factors and doesn't have a chance if you add off-page factors like links and link anchors to the mix)

In this "context" you can absolutely 100% completely ignore keyword density and still rank equally well as a person that thinks keyword density is important because it can be whatever you want it to be.

Now to answer your question:



More than the guy has who is currently #1 (which translates to higher quality as oppose to just quantity).

Well I think we are finally starting to understand each other... I agree with most of what you are saying...

I am beginning to think out argument is more over terminology than anything else...

So lets stop using the word "keyword density" and just talk about 1 specific situation... a case study if you will.... let's discuss a concept

Lets say we have 3 nearly identical websites.. each website had the same quality and quantity of backlinks, from the same sites, the all were started the same week, on the same server, with nearly every on page and off page factor identical... each page even has the same number of words, there is only one difference between these 3 sites.....

Website number 1:
Only uses the keyword 1 time in 1000 words of copy

Website number 2:
Uses the keyword 3-4 times in 1000 words of copy

Website number 3:
Uses the keyword 100 times in 1000 words of copy


Again lets avoid using "You Know What Word" and lets just consider what would appear as a natural and relevant use of a keyword to a computer algorithm.

Lets assume for a moment the keyword is "Web Designer"

So lets consider each web page:

The first site only used the keyword 1 time... If the keyword was only used 1 time, this web page might have nothing to do with web design at all... It could be an article about a tornado that destroyed a small town and one of the people severely injured was a web designer. Google would see the keyword was only used once and consider all the other factors including semantics and rank the page appropriately.


The second website is about a web designer and it naturally uses the word web design a few times because that is what the article is about.
Google would see the keyword naturally used a few times throughout the web page and consider all the other factors including semantics and rank the page appropriately.

The third web page is owned by a web designer who thinks if he uses the keyword in every sentence, he will rank better in Google. Google would see the keyword has been used in a un-natural way, and would consider this keyword stuffing and rank (or not rank) the page appropriately.


I think I have explained the concept that I have experienced and learned over the years, but if I am not being clear or specific enough, then please tell me and I will try to clarify my beliefs.... and If you disagree with the above statements, then please explain to me why you think I am wrong...

I forgot to mention what you said about..



Your answer brings up the point I was trying to make earlier... if you are in the number 2 spot and somehow you finally get more backlinks than the number 1 guy, this does not mean you will move into the number 1 position.. because there is no magic number that will make you number 1.. the algorithm is to complex for any one single factor to have so much influence...

It depends on the quality and context of those links and a myriad of other off page and on page factors... so if all your backilnks are on unrelated websites and use anchor text that has nothing to do with your topic, then they won't help much and if the anchor text on every one of your back links is your exact keyword phrase... you are Google Bombing and Google will figure it out...

This is very similar to "You Know What"

Which one has the most quality links using the phrase and which one has the least? ...that's the ranking order.

All the same links (it'll never occur but ok for argument sake)

Which one has the phrase first in the title element? ...that's the ranking order.

All the same title elements (that definitely wouldn't happen with the same quality links but ok for argument sake)

Which one uses the phrase in headers H1, H2, H3? ...that's the ranking order.

All the same pages title (that absolutely "categorically" will definitely not happen given the same title arrangement with the same quality links but ok for argument sake)...

The 3 example would shuffle randomly - they all be #1, #2, and #3 randomly... just the phrase on the page isn't enough for "solid consistent ranks".

Alternatively, the "only thing that makes ranks without any help from anything else" is links... whil you're playing sillybugger with "density"... I ignore it completely and I'll beat you to #1 EVERY TIME... and you'll never unseat me even if you gain the same link quality... because "history" is also a "factor"... and it trumps density.

As complex as the algorithm is... all densities are like a grain of sand where 1 link is the whole beach (and link quality is like beaches of different sizes).



Google Bombing is about linking "irrelevantly"... e.g. 10,000 miserable failure anchored towards the whitehouse isn't the same a 10,000 "West Wing" or 10,000 "US President".



Ya... you're equally wrong is all cases.

Well again, I think we are beginning to under each other a little better...

I know that 3 websites will never have all the exact same backlinks, etc, etc, etc, etc... that is not the point.... If you are conducting any scientific experiment, then you have to eliminate all other factors first and just consider the question at hand. Debating whether about the likeliness of these criteria occurring is a waste of time and besides the point.

Forget every other possible factor and just image for a second that there are 3 brand new blog posts:

story 1 is about a tornado, which happen to hit a web designers house

story 2 is about a web designer

story 3 is a bunch of gibberish because the author though stuffing the keyword in every sentence was good SEO

Do you really believe...
?