Few can debate the value the engines place on robust, unique, value-added content—Google in particular had several rounds of kicking “low-quality-content” sites out of its indexes, and the other engines have followed suit.
The first critical designation to avoid is “thin content”—a phrase that (loosely) refers to content the engines do not feel contributes enough unique material to display a page competitively in the search results. How much content is enough content to not be considered thin? The criteria have never been officially listed, but many examples/discussions from engineers and search engine representatives would place the following on the list:
• At least thirty to 50 unique words, forming unique, parse-able sentences that other sites/pages do not have (for many pages much more is appropriate, consider this a minimum).
• Unique HTML text content, different from other pages on the site in more than just the replacement of key verbs and nouns (yes, this means all those webmasters who build the same page and just change the city and state names thinking it is “unique” are mistaken).
• Unique titles and meta description elements. If you can’t write unique meta descriptions, just exclude them. Algorithms can trip up pages and boot them from the index simply for having near-duplicate meta tags.
• Unique video/audio/image content. The engines have started getting smarter about identifying and indexing pages for vertical search that wouldn’t normally meet the “uniqueness” criteria.
The next criterion from the engines demands that websites “add value” to the content they publish, particularly if it comes from (wholly or partially) a secondary source.
Read More : Digital Marketing Services in Delhi