You may well be right about the poo-pooing. OTOH I'm giving you the benefit of my experience, free, and have no reason to grandstand or mislead you. I think using any page analysis tool like this is a waste of time, so would not recommend using one.
* You have 4 instances of your keyword on this page. Google prefers between 10 and 12 instances. Try adding more keywords
* You have 7 text links containing your key word on this page. Google only suggests having between 3 and 6. Try reducing your text links
* You have only one image ALT tag with your keyword in it. Google prefers at least 10. Consider increasing your ALT tag keywords.
"4 occurrences of keyword here and 6 occurrences of keyword there"-type advice is useless imho.
Your response implies that page optimization is completely irrelevant.
No, it doesn't. ;)
So WPG simply notified you that if you have 45 instances of your keyword... Seems valuable to me, even today, no?
Anyone can tell whether a page's content reads naturally or is keyword-stuffed. *Anyone*.
But keyword frequency and other issues also played a role. So you're saying they've actually reduced the requirements for quality rankings...
What makes you think keyword frequency is a measure of quality...?
I'd recommend downloading Google's SEO Starter Guide [googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com] if you haven't read it already. WebmasterWorld also has lots of useful advice, in the archives and in ongoing discussions too. :)