Talk:Spamdexing/Archives/2021

This is an archive of past discussions about Spamdexing. 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.

"Pages with no information related to page title" removal

The following section titled "Pages with no information related to page title":

"Publishing web pages that contain information that is unrelated to the title is a misleading practice known as deception. Despite being a target for penalties from the leading search engines that rank pages, deception is a common practice in some types of sites, including dictionary and encyclopedia sites."

does not strike me as a notable spamdexing technique (considering that it is common sense that search engines check both title and content of a page). Additionally, there are no source references to support it, and it has been marked as "confusing" for over 6 years. I have removed the section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lankyliver (talk • contribs) 11:25, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Page Title

Who has actually used the term "Spamdexing"? A much more common term would be Black Hat SEO. The Spanish version of Wikipedia uses that term:

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hat_SEO

If possible to change the page title, Black Hat SEO, would be a much more accurate phrasing in term of real world use. DirkDouse (talk) 06:00, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

DirkDouse, you've raised a fair point. Normally it wouldn't bother me, but if you would like to change it to ensure consistency with other-language Wikipedias, feel free to be bold and go with it. Lankyliver🧠 (talk / contribs) 07:48, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Content spam

Why are there no pictures of these spams? It's detailed with descriptions but adding a picture will strengthen these sections and look much more user friendly.Aajoseph12 (talk) 19:01, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Well, I believe it has something to do with the fact that a lot of the sections detailing individual spams are rather short: if you were to insert images to visually support all mentioned topics, the article would look a bit like a gallery, not an encyclopedic entry. Furthermore, it's quite easy to visualize a lot of them.

But then again, an article without images just has something..."missing" from it. If I were you, I'd spread out a few around the article. Just make sure the images are useful enough, and follow the relevant copyright guidelines. Lankyliver🧠 (talk / contribs) 08:01, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Hidden text sometimes used for accessibility?

What does this mean? Where is the citation? This should be taken out altogether. Texaseliz (talk) 09:23, 2 May 2021 (UTC)