Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 184.108.40.206
Forum Moderators: not2easy
online|on the web|in cyber
regarding|targeted at|in regards to
site developers|internet marketing|webmasters
is currently|would be this
joined:Mar 7, 2011
However, if your site is full of AdSense and alienated visitors look for the first click off a page that offends their sensibilities, then it's gonna rock the CTR!
I'm still not sure I understand the issue.
anyone that is using spun content, probably wouldn't want to share, it's going to lessen the chances of their content passing the gradeThere's no difference if the content was written on canvas, on black board, on paper, or machine-produced.
Matt Cutts.. often finds that honest webmasters worry about dupe content when they donít need to. G tries to always return the "best" version of a page. Some people are less conscious... A lot of people ask about articles split into parts and then printable versions.
Do not worry about G penalizing for this.
Different top level domains: if you own a.com and a.fr, for example, donít worry about dupe content in this case.
General rule of thumb: think of SEís as a sort of a hyperactive 4 year old kid that is smart in some ways and not so in others: use KISS rule and keep it simple.
While itís helpful to try to pick one of those articles and exclude the other version from indexing, typically a whitehat site doesnít neet to worry about 1-3 versions of an article on their own site. However, I would be mindful that taking all your articles and submitting them for syndication all over the place can make it more difficult to determine how much the site wrote its own content vs. just used syndicated content.
In other words: Go ahead and spin. With a limit of course. Be cautious of course. Use the spun content to link to the main source.
In other words: Go ahead and spin.
a whitehat site doesnít neet to worry about 1-3 versions of an article on their own siteThat's completely different from spinning 50 different versions.
He also said that Google isn't penalizing for this. He never said that spinning content actually helps in any way.What else shall he say?!
Not sure how you concluded that from what I said ;)
Hmm, cute spin :)
But if you know how to read between the lines.
Matt Cutts talks about 3 identical copies.
Some people are less conscious. The person claimed he was having problems with dupe content and not appearing in both G and Y. Turns out he had 2500 domains. A lot of people ask about articles split into parts and then printable versions. Do not worry about G penalizing for this.
If this is an accurate summary, and Iím reading what youíre saying, then thereís no need to worry about duplicate content issues when submitting articles. Is that correct?On which he clarified that 'what he was saying was' that typically a whitehat site shouldn't worry about 1-3 versions of an article on their own site.
joined:Mar 7, 2011
joined:Jan 30, 2002
joined:Mar 7, 2011
are these articles rewritten by a machine, or has someone used a spinner to physically rewrite the articlesThe examples you gave seem to be spun articles (not humanly rewritten).
The reason I called them 'garbage' sites is because they have no link to the subject matter, rather are meant to grab searchers and drive them to a page filled with ads and popups(my firefox is ads or popups immune so I didn't notice.) To me it seems article posting for links (to other sites).
joined:Mar 7, 2011
[edited by: tedster at 3:09 pm (utc) on Apr 12, 2011]
[edit reason] removed signature link [/edit]
I assume make perfect grammatical sense
Studies have shown that a sizeable percentage of pet cats are really never purebred. A lot of them are merged with various breeds in which, as little as 3%, are the type which might be pedigreed. Even so, having a non-purebred cat for a pet will not seriously make any significant difference in comparison with pedigreed pet cats.
Research has disclosed that a majority of pet cats are certainly never purebred. The bulk of them are combined with a variety of breeds where, as low as 3%, are those which might be pedigreed. Nevertheless, having a non-purebred cat for a pet doesn't really make any difference when compared to the pedigreed pet cats.
Research has shown that a large percentage of pet cats are really not purebred. Most of them are mixed with a variety of breeds in which, as low as 3%, are the type that happen to be pedigreed. Having said that, enjoying a non-purebred cat as a pet doesn't seriously make any difference in comparison to pedigreed pet cats.
Reports have shown that generally speaking pet cats rarely are completely purebred. Many are merged with several breeds where, as little as 3%, are those that are pedigreed. Even so, enjoying a non-purebred cat as a pet does not seriously make any significant difference when compared to the pedigreed pet cats.
Sorry, but USA dictionaries don't count for the genuine English language..
And if you only use English..( as in dictionaries printed in and to be used in England ..the country of origin of the English language ) dictionaries..you won't find the illiterate word of linguistically illegitimate origins "pedigreed"..
[edited by: Leosghost at 11:49 pm (utc) on Apr 4, 2011]
Seriously off topic ;-)
take a look at the m_en_us in the URL string of your link there ) especially the "us" part ..see
I'm going by the actual dead tree versions of the OED that I have right here beside me
Next you'll be telling me that "nucular" is indeed correct