Talk:Search engine optimization/Archive 6

This is an archive of past discussions about Search engine optimization. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

This edit request to Search engine optimization has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Masud27623657239 (talk) 12:14, 13 September 2024 (UTC)What Are Backlinks?

Backlinks are links on other websites that point to your website. In the world of (Search Engine Optimization), they’re like votes of credibility from other sites. The more high-quality backlinks you have, the higher your website is likely to rank in search results

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Charliehdb (talk) 14:34, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Hello,

I’ve been reviewing the Search Engine Optimization article, and I believe the section on on-page SEO techniques could benefit from an update. Given the recent emphasis Google has placed on Core Web Vitals as a ranking signal, this topic seems underrepresented in the current article.

Would it be worth expanding this section to include a breakdown of Core Web Vitals (Largest Contentful Paint, First Input Delay, and Cumulative Layout Shift) and their importance in modern SEO strategies? There’s solid research from sources like Google’s Web.dev and independent SEO research firms like Moz that could be used as references.

I’d be happy to help provide references and structure the update if the community agrees it would add value to the article. Looking forward to your feedback! Shahzaibahmadkhan (talk) 17:52, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

It would depend on the sources used, taking note of the spam warnings on your talk page. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:39, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Core Web Vitals is not a major ranking signal and it's only specific to Google. Search engine optimization is about managing the relationship between Websites and ALL search engines. There is no justification for including a section about Core Web Vitals in this article. It seriously needs clean up. Adding more Google-specific content that isn't even significant will just make it less useful. Michael Martinez (talk) 15:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

This edit request to Search engine optimization has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

please allow me to edit Abs sadiq (talk) 02:13, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

It doesn't work that way. Read the instructions in the tag you placed in your request. And if you're hoping to drop a link in the article to your Website, that won't last more than 10 minutes at most. Michael Martinez (talk) 02:21, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

There is no Wikipedia-acceptable reliable source that accurately describes the difference between a "blog network" and a "link farm". These articles have been challenged by some Wikipedians for not sourcing their statements of fact correctly, and that's just never going to happen because the people who created these spam systems don't publish academic papers, aren't profiled by the Wall Street Journal, and aren't considered reliable sources. A link farm is any group of Websites that all link to each other [regardless of whether they are blogs] for the purpose of manipulating or influencing search engine crawling, indexing, and/or ranking. The link farms were created by adding pages filled with links to existing Websites. They had nothing to do with blogging.

Link spammers turned to creating blog networks that sold home page backlinks after the link farms were killed off by the search engines. The blog networks did NOT all link to each other. They merely sold links to other sites. This article and the Link Farm article should not be using the terms interchangeably. That's like saying killer whales are sharks because they're both sea predators. Michael Martinez (talk) 05:30, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Hey Michael Martinez - I think the edit that flagged your concern was one that I made, and it was not intended to cause trouble or make it so that this article was taking a stance on this. I noticed that "blog network" was linking to "link farm" and so I tried to call out clearly where that link was going to take someone before they clicked it. You made the right call by just deleting that out. I think this is definitely an issue within Wikipedia, and a distinction that's needed, but not sure where to take this from here.Dflovett (talk) 18:07, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

This article is a mess and doesn't really do things the Wikipedia way. But for reasons I explained above, there's never going to be a Wikipedia way to document search engine optimization accurately. There are no industry standards, everyone (even in academia) just makes up terminology for their own purposes, and the people who pioneered some of these techniques (including me) are considered Primary Sources (although there is a suggested way to use them - Wikipedia:Identifying and using primary sources - Wikipedia). At this point, my goal is just to keep the confusion in the article to a minimum. I don't have time and energy to do much actual editing on Wikipedia these days. Michael Martinez (talk) 19:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

This edit request to Search engine optimization has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I would like to add an internal link to the term "target audience" in the sentence:

Current text: which search engines are preferred by a target audience.

Proposed change in source editor format: which search engines are preferred by a target audience.

This will link the phrase "target audience" to the Wikipedia article on Target audience (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Target_audience), providing additional context and helping readers understand the term better. Digital Dharmesh (talk) 05:09, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Note: I'm not convinced it's needed. M.Bitton (talk) 11:49, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. Due to M.Bitton opposing the requested edit, I am marking this as not done for now, once a consensus has been reached, you may reopen the request. Shadow311 (talk) 18:11, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

This edit request to Search engine optimization has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Shahnewajkhan (talk) 20:44, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

Request to Update Outdated Information on Mobile Search & Indexing

Hi, I would like to update a section of the article to reflect the latest developments in Google's mobile-first indexing and mobile search strategy.

Current Text: "In 2015, it was reported that Google was developing and promoting mobile search as a key feature within future products. In response, many brands began to take a different approach to their Internet marketing strategies."

Proposed Revision: "Since 2015, Google has prioritized mobile search as a key factor in search rankings, leading to the widespread adoption of mobile-first indexing. In 2020, Google confirmed that all websites would be indexed based on their mobile versions.^[1] This shift prompted businesses to optimize their websites for mobile performance, focusing on factors such as loading speed, interactivity, and visual stability—metrics now measured by Core Web Vitals.^[2] Furthermore, Google has continued enhancing mobile search with AI-powered features, including AI Overviews and an experimental AI Mode, reshaping the way users interact with search results.^[3]"

Reason for Edit: The current sentence only references 2015 predictions about mobile search, which are outdated.

The proposed edit includes factual updates on mobile-first indexing (officially implemented in 2020).

It adds relevant, verifiable sources from Google, ensuring accuracy.

The revised content provides a more comprehensive overview of how mobile search has evolved.

Thank you for reviewing this request!

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. (secondary sources) Perception312 (talk) 20:13, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

While keyword stuffing is still recognized as a bad practice, I believe the article should mention newer search algorithms like BERT, RankBrain, and their focus on understanding user intent and context. Perhaps we can update the section to reflect the evolution of search engine algorithms. ASWATHI S Nambiar (talk) 06:41, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Please propose a reliable source. Grayfell (talk) 10:06, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

I believe search engine land is a reliable source, they publish articles, analyses, and research reports on SEO and search engine algorithms.

https://searchengineland.com/library/platforms/google/google-algorithm-updates

ASWATHI S Nambiar (talk) 04:39, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Based on your talk page, you have previously been warned about promotional editing, so I can't help but suspect your intentions for wanting to add this site are promotional. Do you have any affiliation with it? TornadoLGS (talk) 04:42, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

I suggested Search Engine Land because it provides a clear explanation of BERT and RankBrain's impact on keyword stuffing, a topic currently lacking in the Wikipedia article.

I believe this information is crucial for an update. I'm also happy to supplement it with corroborating sources like Search Engine Journal and Moz. My goal is to improve the article, not promote any specific site. ASWATHI S Nambiar (talk) 05:05, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

I think this is a good idea, but it's worth noting that Moz is a blocked domain on Wikipedia right now due to past activity. Dflovett (talk) 15:59, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

I've made targeted edits to address the maintenance tags:

• Replaced outdated 2008 UK market share data with current 2024 statistics
• Removed irrelevant 2006 industry size comparisons
• Updated general statements about Google's market dominance with current context
• Removed prescriptive language and business advice
• Changed tutorial-style "how to" content to neutral descriptions
• Replaced subjective recommendations with objective industry observations
• Consolidated repetitive Google algorithm update history
• Maintained informational value while improving readability

Request review for removal of maintenance tags. TarynCheese (talk) 01:58, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

This edit request to Search engine optimization has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

1. In the "History" section, add this paragraph after the 2024 update note:

  "By 2024, the rise of generative AI tools like ChatGPT and Google's Search Generative Experience (SGE) led to the development of Generative Engine Optimization (GEO). This new approach focuses on optimizing content for AI-generated answers in addition to traditional search results, requiring adjustments to content structure and authority signals.[1][2]"

2. Add a new subsection under "Methods" titled "AI and generative search optimization" with:

"

  With the advent of AI-powered search tools, SEO strategies have expanded to include:
  * Optimization for featured snippets in AI-generated answers
  * Structured data markup for large language model comprehension
  * Balancing AI-assisted content creation with Google's 'Helpful Content' guidelines[3]"

References: [1] https://blog.google/products/search/generative-ai-search/ [2] https://www.searchenginejournal.com/generative-engine-optimization/492329/ [3] https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2023/02/google-search-and-ai-content Microarindam (talk) 20:03, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Your second reference is a dead link, and the other two (from Google) are somewhat promotional, and I would consider them primary sources. Ideally, with reference to more reliable sources, the tone of this can be made less promotional. Seercat3160 (talk) 10:34, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

This edit request to Search engine optimization has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

{{subst:trim|1=

Current: “Search engine optimization (SEO) is the process of improving the quality and quantity of website traffic to a website or a web page from search engines.”

Suggested Revision: “Search engine optimization (SEO) refers to techniques used to enhance both the quality and volume of traffic to a website or web page through organic search engine results.”

Billysee (talk) 05:27, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: No reason given for the proposed change. Day Creature (talk) 16:52, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

The page doesn't even contain any indication that SEO has any relevance to spam, or that anybody has ever connected the concepts.

According to the archives, the page used to contain information about the pros and cons, controversies, negative effects and social impacts. 

Now all the discussion seems to be about exactly which SEO practices and companies can be promoted more.

Is it really just me that thinks if a practice is so frequently exploited for profit that the world's richest companies have spent decades trying to combat (according to Google, anyway) the Wikipedia page linked to 'SEO spam' ought to contain at least a section on the negative impacts, rather than a vague paragraph on 'black hat SEO' presenting the multi-billion dollar scam industry as a quirky trickster who occasionally changes hats? Moubliezpas (talk) 10:16, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

Where are you seeing this page linked to as "SEO spam"? I believe there should probably be a "criticism of SEO" section on this page and have been planning to create one. But I don't know what you're referencing. Dflovett (talk) 02:30, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

The best source I have is this Verge article: https://www.theverge.com/features/23931789/seo-search-engine-optimization-experts-google-results

I think it would be useful to have a few more. Interested in what others think. Dflovett (talk) 20:52, 3 September 2025 (UTC)