Exact keyword density

[miko67]

Most people in here must have their own idea as to the exact keyword density optimal for Google placement...

Now, we all know that KW-density doesn't do it alone nonono, we need backlinks and what-have-you...

But how 'bout sharing your thoughts, evidence, investigations (underway as well as done), on the contributions of KW-density to the position in google-seach.

References to older threads on same subject is much appreciated, might even be reliable too - still.

[JonahViaKeyboard]

Google can recognize abnormal density and language patterns. They can translate pages. They know when repetition is unnatural.

Write naturally, and you will prosper.

[miko67]

Write naturally, and you will prosper.You know what Jonah.. I think you do have a point - at least this has happened to me once (changing a copy from original no-KW-focus to focusing heavily on one KW reaching a density around 6-8% in ca. 500 words resulting in gliding from no.11 to no.23). However this advice would take some of the "fun" - or work if you will - out of the SEO-pro's business, wouldn't it? :(

[yfs1]

Here is a great tool for judging that "natural" feel :

http://textalyser.net

[digitalpoint]

Write for the user, and forget about keyword density. It will always be natural then.

[Foxy]

Here is a great tool for judging that "natural" feel :

http://textalyser.net

I'm not sure what that does for me.......

However I do think that 6-8% KWD mentioned is quite light but also irrelevant

I have many sites that have only two keyword phrases at the start of the page - a navigation bar and then not a lot of text followed by a footer.

I even asked here on the forum what others would do on one site to go higher [than 6] for a certain KW phrase - and following their advice I placed in relevant text to build the relevant content - the result I went lower - took the drivel out, I went back up!

What I do know is that Google can differentiate [obviously] between navigation and page [text] linking and that the percentage KWD is an absolute waste of time.

On this site - the same technique on each page - I have over 30 first 10 positions of which 20 are 1, 1+2 or 2

So which method would you use? :)

BTW Shawn is absolutely correct

[miko67]

Wow.. now I can see how mutch time I have been wasting over the last two-three months messuring KW-density and pondering over which would be better :) hehe.. I can now rethink the whole process - hopefully in a better way. Thx for good commenting. (gonna check out the tool and let you know what i think)

[yfs1]

I'm not sure what that does for me.......



I don't knwo what it does for you but this is a great tool to use when writing keyword rich content to be sure you are still making sense. Its like having someone else proofread it for you.

I suspect Google uses similar tools to judge how natural a website is.

Noone writes a real sentence like. "We have blue widgets that are the best widgets a person looking for widgets could want." Therefore something like that would recieve a low "natural" score.