Talk:Search engine optimization

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Search engine optimization article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7: 12 months

Search engine optimization is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 2, 2007.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 7, 2007	Peer review	Reviewed
April 9, 2007	Good article nominee	Listed
June 1, 2007	Featured article candidate	Promoted
June 23, 2008	Featured article review	Kept
October 14, 2012	Featured article review	Demoted
Current status: Former featured article

Search engine optimization copywriting was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 23 October 2012 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Search engine optimization. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Image search optimization was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 14 September 2011 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Search engine optimization. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Computing: Software / Websites Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Websites (assessed as Mid-importance).

Internet High‑importance

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Marketing & Advertising High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Marketing & Advertising, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Marketing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Marketing & AdvertisingWikipedia:WikiProject Marketing & AdvertisingTemplate:WikiProject Marketing & AdvertisingMarketing & Advertising
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Spoken Wikipedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that are spoken on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Spoken WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaSpoken Wikipedia

This article is prone to spam. Please monitor the References and External links sections.

Suggested Merge of SEO Specialist into this article

The article SEO Specialist pretty much only describes what, how and why SEO is done but has the problems that it is an orphan and does not really use reliable sources. This article does a much better job at explaining all of that and does not have these problems. Therefore, i propose to merge the SEO Specialist article into this main article.

(I know that in some cases, it makes sense to have two articles (as for Architect <-> Architecture) but those are much bigger topics/articles.) Nyraxis (talk) 13:16, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What would be the point of the merger, though? The SEO Specialist is a real job (plenty of job listings for it) and you'd still have the problem of not finding reliable sources for the content if it's merged into this article. It's not like there's a lot of Wikipedia-qualified reliable content about SEO anyway. There are no industry standards and most of what is written about SEO in the media is sensationalized nonsense. I think it might make more sense to interlink the articles or propose the deletion of the SEO Specialist article. Michael Martinez (talk) 13:29, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect. I don't think there is any real value in the SEO specialist article. Each company decides what these roles do. Michael Martinez (talk) 15:06, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge (selectively). The overlap is huge, and the SEO specialist article is underdeveloped. Furthermore, since SEO Specialist is NOT mentioned at Search engine optimization, SEO Specialist could and probably should be viewed as a CONTENTFORK. For sure, it is an improper SPINOUT. Thank you, Michael Martinez, for proposing this merge! gidonb (talk) 04:25, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Merge. The SEO Specialist article should stay separate from the main Search Engine Optimization (SEO) article. An SEO Specialist is a special job with its own tasks, skills, and career paths. This detailed information might be lost if merged. The SEO Specialist article gives clear information on job details, industry demand, career growth, and best practices. Improving this article with good sources and links to other articles is a better idea. Some users need clear information about the role of an SEO Specialist, which a separate article gives better. Merging could make the main SEO article too long and unclear. Separate articles allow for clear and focused content. The SEO Specialist article is a good learning tool for those who want to specialize in SEO. It gives focused insights and career advice. So, keep the SEO Specialist article as it is. It gives detailed information and stays clear for Wikipedia's users. Ibn Juferi (talk) 05:16, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with this entirely. The collective term for a person who practices SEO is "an SEO". SEO is the the skillset and an SEO is practitioner. The SEO Specialist page needs to stay separate and it need to incorporate the differing titles within the SEO community such as SEO Executive, SEO Manager and SEO Consultant. All of these practice SEO but they are at different points in their SEO career. An SEO executive is typically a junior with 1-2 years experience whereas an SEO Consultant often has more than 10 years experience in the profession. MrMarky1982 (talk) 14:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. This is not a real article, it is likely AI-generated (GPTZero probability, 75%). It is an essay. The article title can be redirected and that will do the trick. As for the comments of the page creator (now blocked), Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a source of career advice. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:30, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Going to a WP:BOLD merge/redirect here seeing a consensus. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:05, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 13 September 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

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

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)[reply]

Proposal to Expand Section on Core Web Vitals in SEO

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Technical seo

Technical seo is two types one is off page seo and on page seo 2409:40F0:112A:518F:4AD0:38DC:659B:3E75 (talk) 07:34, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blog networks are not link farms, and vice versa

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)[reply]