freejung - 9:30 pm on Jun 29, 2011 (gmt 0) [edited by: freejung at 9:49 pm (utc) on Jun 29, 2011]
So this person from Google says that words per article and text-to-ad ratios are not part of the Google algorithm.
She most certainly did not say that. She said that can't be the only reason this guy is not ranking. That's not remotely the same thing.
Google is almost certainly measuring these things. What she's saying is that these factors by themselves will not cause you to be penalized or pandalized. These signals might still be used in conjunction with other signals to measure site quality.
The real meat of what she's saying is not about whether particular factors are part of the algo, it's a much broader point, which she clarifies in a later post:
once you've started counting the words on your pages and making changes "for SEO purposes, rather than user information," you've missed the point
If you're trying to cover a super complex in-depth topic in 200 words, you'd better make your article longer, not because you will be penalized for having too low a word count, but because you are not providing adequate information about the subject. For some other topic, 200 words might be perfectly adequate. In some cases it might be way too much -- maybe the best possible answer is a single short sentence.
The point is that this level of micro-analysis is entirely the wrong approach to SEO, in Google's opinion.
"...there are too many damn machines around here. We're all missing The Big Picture." - Peter O'Toole in "Creator"
The decision tree could have such complex if-then looping logic that we'd also be very challenged to get the big picture.
Even worse, it could be exhibiting emergent properties.
It is entirely possible that nobody, not even within Google, actually knows how the Panda algo works. Or if they do, it's because they can measure its behavior directly, not because they explicitly designed it to behave that way.
[edited by: freejung at 9:49 pm (utc) on Jun 29, 2011]