Post by account_disabled on Dec 20, 2023 2:44:04 GMT -3
Sector of activity, audience, editorial line and obviously the more technical optimization which is discussed in this article. There are only special cases. This is why taking a step back and analyzing it are essential. Correlation or not? As is often the case in SEO, we come back to the same debate: correlation or causation. The excellent Olivier Andrieu published a video on the subject. Can we therefore say from this study that there is a cause and effect link between performance and technical findings? There is nothing to say. The items in question may simply perform well because they are of good quality. My advice : Although this study seems well done, it has many limitations.
There is no evidence of a link between the data collected and other factors that may affect Email Data performance. Concerning the number of words in an article, it is a very variable data. It must be assessed on a case-by-case basis depending on the competition for the targeted keyword. In addition, we know that for some time now, Google has favored less technical elements than the simple number of words. Especially since it is a criterion that is not natural. You can always rewrite a title so that it has 15 words or add a few hundred words to an article. But we know that Google doesn't like what is not natural and which, by definition, can be distorted. GOOGLE EAT: what is it? EAT means: Expertise / Authority / Reliability (Trustworthiness).
For several months these are the elements on which Google has based itself to evaluate the relevance of a site and its content. Expertise is actually a fairly old criterion . Google has always loved and valued experts. This is one of the reasons why by writing a single article on a subject, you will have difficulty positioning yourself. And this is also why semantic cocoons can have good results. Authority : this point is linked to the incoming links that you must receive from other sites, if possible influential. Reliability / Credibility : secure site, https, legal notices… Should you write an article for humans or for search engines? It's a question that comes up quite often and which divides professionals in the profession: should we write for humans while banking on the fact that if the article is good, interesting, well done, it will naturally be read and go viral through engagement on social media.
There is no evidence of a link between the data collected and other factors that may affect Email Data performance. Concerning the number of words in an article, it is a very variable data. It must be assessed on a case-by-case basis depending on the competition for the targeted keyword. In addition, we know that for some time now, Google has favored less technical elements than the simple number of words. Especially since it is a criterion that is not natural. You can always rewrite a title so that it has 15 words or add a few hundred words to an article. But we know that Google doesn't like what is not natural and which, by definition, can be distorted. GOOGLE EAT: what is it? EAT means: Expertise / Authority / Reliability (Trustworthiness).
For several months these are the elements on which Google has based itself to evaluate the relevance of a site and its content. Expertise is actually a fairly old criterion . Google has always loved and valued experts. This is one of the reasons why by writing a single article on a subject, you will have difficulty positioning yourself. And this is also why semantic cocoons can have good results. Authority : this point is linked to the incoming links that you must receive from other sites, if possible influential. Reliability / Credibility : secure site, https, legal notices… Should you write an article for humans or for search engines? It's a question that comes up quite often and which divides professionals in the profession: should we write for humans while banking on the fact that if the article is good, interesting, well done, it will naturally be read and go viral through engagement on social media.