Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 3.85.214.0

Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi

Message Too Old, No Replies

How Google defines "Content"

     
10:02 pm on Dec 28, 2016 (gmt 0)

New User

Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Dec 20, 2016
posts: 13
votes: 1


How Google defines "Content"?

It may seems dumb or obvious or even impossible to define, but we know that content seems the most valuable SEO matter of all.
Should I just fill it up a text with related keywords? Which is the limit of keyword not to repeat to be considered spam? How Google consider a "rich", "valuable" and good content?
Should I choose an elite grammar full of synonymous and particular words that we don't find around? Should I do the opposite, go simple?
Should I just try to imitate the website that is on the top of the list nowadays?

Glad to hear your ideas on the subject.
1:53 am on Dec 29, 2016 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member editorialguy is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:June 28, 2013
posts:3476
votes: 781


I think the best bet is to "be natural." Phony patterns can't be that difficult for Google to spot: It's had a lot of experience over the years.

As Google says, "build pages for users, not for search engines."
3:16 am on Dec 29, 2016 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Oct 3, 2015
posts:132
votes: 64


I'd disagree.
ED Guy often goes off half-cocked. Build relevant content, use keywords where appropriate and expand topics into other articles where you can develop those topics with even more keywords.
4:29 am on Dec 29, 2016 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from US 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member lucy24 is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Apr 9, 2011
posts:15869
votes: 869


I'd disagree.

With which point?
5:41 am on Dec 29, 2016 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Oct 3, 2015
posts:132
votes: 64


The incorrect one, obviously.
6:09 am on Dec 29, 2016 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from US 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member tangor is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Nov 29, 2005
posts:10457
votes: 1091


Instead of asking how G defines content, one should ask themselves what defines content. Pretty sure keywords (largely deprecated these days) is still a part of the "content", but I like my content to have value more than a few keywords.

If gaming g is the goal then content is irrelevant.

Additionally, not all content is valued the same. Ecom, for example, might not have the "sexy" of an entertainment site or the "punch" of an edu site, or the necessity of a gov site.
6:26 am on Dec 29, 2016 (gmt 0)

Junior Member

Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Oct 3, 2015
posts:132
votes: 64


I don't really follow the concept that keywords are largely deprecated. Meaning, I understand the concept, but I think the concept has been spun to the point where it seems keywords are a bad thing.

There are terms, and related terms, that are necessary for conveying concepts. Which is a totally different world than keywords related to large screen televisions.

I believe it is a fairly important distinction that the wonks never make.
6:41 am on Dec 29, 2016 (gmt 0)

New User

Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Dec 20, 2016
posts: 13
votes: 1


Ok, let's touch base with the last two answers.

Tangor : Ok value/content, but what it is? I mean, how Google can measure this and decide it's high or low, I don't care in here if it's something pleasantly written or if it's a mess like my English, I care about how Google consider it, which number Google give to my text, why and how.

Walt: Keywords in metatags are kind of deprecated, while in titles, descriptions, H1 and content no, however sometime too many keywords are too much and it's penalized. When it's too much?
7:51 am on Dec 29, 2016 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from US 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member keyplyr is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Sept 26, 2001
posts:12913
votes: 893


When building new pages & writing content (articles) I've always considered code to content ratio: 1/5 but no more than 1/7.

I target a specific subject and try not to compete with other pages on the site

In doing the above, a natural amount of relevant keywords & phrases will occur. This relieves the need to do artificial keyword stuffing, and thus the pages have a natural relevancy in content that Google has come to reward.
10:42 am on Dec 29, 2016 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from GB 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Sept 16, 2009
posts:1087
votes: 83


I think some people are a little too keen with the 'forget keywords and focus on topics' line, or perhaps it's misunderstood.

Google HAS moved away from keywords: the patents I've read about, the SERPs I've seen, and my own (pretty limited) direct observations for some time make that much clear.

But keywords, where you can verify the precise word or phrase, its search volume and user intent from AdWords, are still very useful for one reason: THAT IS WHAT THE USER TYPED IN. That is what they expect to see. It's called reinforcement, and in PPC it works very well.

Now, Google will attempt to 'understand' their query - and it might be a lazy query - but, all other things being equal, using the same terms that the user does prominently in your copy is going to help on any and all levels.

Keywords in metatags are kind of deprecated

As far as I am aware they have been totally irrelevant for years.
... while in... descriptions

Again, last I checked, the meta description has no direct ranking effect, in that Google does not retrieve a page with a unique gibberish phrase in its meta description even when you search for that phrase. But, as with PPC, the right keywords in the description will increase the chance that it is shown for the user's query so again you have reinforcement.
12:12 pm on Dec 29, 2016 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from US 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member tangor is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Nov 29, 2005
posts:10457
votes: 1091


Content needs to be unique for it to stand out.

What many can't see is that there are a limited number of ways to be unique when describing the same things. How many ways can you describe a glass of water or a baseball bat? Get too clever or far afield and your reader will not know what they are reading. It's not that what we webmasters are writing is not "original" it is more likely that we are "common" since there are a million others doing the exact same thing.

To be different you need more than content alone, you need speed, access, a BRAND, loyalty, outside forces such as word of mouth, tv, radio, newspapers and if ecom then sterling service and excellent customer support.

Content that is properly written will have all the natural keywords desired .... and will respond to a query seeking that same info.

The OP's query is how does g RATE content good or bad and I truly do not have an answer to how the black box works, only observations of the results that come out of the black box.
7:33 pm on Dec 29, 2016 (gmt 0)

Senior Member

WebmasterWorld Senior Member editorialguy is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:June 28, 2013
posts:3476
votes: 781


The OP's query is how does g RATE content good or bad and I truly do not have an answer to how the black box works, only observations of the results that come out of the black box.

I had the impression that the OP was asking about shortcuts, e.g.: "Should I choose an elite grammar full of synonymous and particular words that we don't find around?" The trouble with shortcuts is that they're unlikely to be original, and they're likely to be obvious.
7:11 am on Dec 30, 2016 (gmt 0)

Senior Member from US 

WebmasterWorld Senior Member tangor is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

joined:Nov 29, 2005
posts:10457
votes: 1091


Tangor : Ok value/content, but what it is? I mean, how Google can measure this and decide it's high or low,


I'm just going by the OP's interest in how G values content. I don't have an answer. I hope someone else does!

What is being rated, how, and what factors can change that rating? That's the hard part. I don't have an answer that can codified, used as an example for others, or guarantee results. Like the OP, if we could find the answer to THAT burning question we'd all be bazillionaires using cookie cutter templates.