2 months old website gets 500k visitors/m with spun content
- Thread starter nathantheboss
- Start date
jem001
Regular Member
- Jan 14, 2012
- 489
- 193
4 million articles? No wonder they getting that much traffic! But is all articles indexed?
thetraveller
BANNED
- Mar 9, 2009
- 1,440
- 873
I guess not every one of the 4 mil... but even with a small percent of 5%-10% indexed that would still be a huge number...
- Aug 15, 2014
- 4,084
- 3,887
I have servers, give it to me lolGoogle is getting retard nowdays.
I saw one website that rank for 1,000,000 monthly search in less than a day.
And I know how he do it.
But i’m just lazy. Lazy to spend $500 bucks
Also don’t want my server get jammed.
As the traffic is junk for that keyword, aint gonna convert much $$
IMMFROMPORTUGAL
Regular Member
- Nov 9, 2020
- 208
- 87
Google is getting retard nowdays.
I saw one website that rank for 1,000,000 monthly search in less than a day.
And I know how he do it.
But i’m just lazy. Lazy to spend $500 bucks
Also don’t want my server get jammed.
As the traffic is junk for that keyword, aint gonna convert much $$
can't you replicate that for different keywords?
- Mar 30, 2018
- 12,102
- 14,386
Maybe spamming google is the only way to rank, maybe that’s why big sites are doing it not following seo rules and yet banking
AdamLife
Newbie
- Nov 8, 2020
- 18
- 8
I completly agree with you for example it seems they are scrapling data from wikipedia for some articles
- Feb 28, 2019
- 7,498
- 7,980
This looks like a simple wiki site. They are probably trying to be a better version of wikipedia. Google prefers such sites as they only share info and not opinions. The info category covers dictionary, wiki, thesaurus, encyclopedia, education & scientific research, government sites, libraries etc. They will have high authority and trust score.
Silent Smoker
Newbie
- Sep 21, 2018
- 30
- 12
I think they made a cleaver point here. they are hammering googles readability with thousands of pages.
Matheus Moreira
Power Member
- Jul 14, 2017
- 753
- 397
Nice share buddy
Larry Igna
Power Member
- Nov 25, 2016
- 663
- 715
There is no summarization, it's straight plagiarized content. I just ran few pages through Quetext and 1text and it's over 95% plagiarized text, both tools show that.
- Apr 30, 2018
- 1,923
- 1,512
That site looks too professional to be honest
- May 8, 2012
- 4,219
- 3,728
always these threads of people who think spun content cant rank. then there is constantly proof and everybody is wondering how
instead of just assuming that something doesnt work, why dont you look at the facts instead of denying things without trying ?
spun/copied content works just as well as original super unique content written by the most expensive copywriter, its just about how you do it.
the other excuse then is "its not gonna last long / its going to get a penalty / blah blah blah" no its not it can last for years that way.
instead of just assuming that something doesnt work, why dont you look at the facts instead of denying things without trying ?
spun/copied content works just as well as original super unique content written by the most expensive copywriter, its just about how you do it.
the other excuse then is "its not gonna last long / its going to get a penalty / blah blah blah" no its not it can last for years that way.
r3dfear
Newbie
- Dec 12, 2020
- 5
- 3
I don't think you are completely right, I have also run several tests myself and here is what I found:
1. Quetext sucks, even completely original text written by a professional writer was shown to have %47 of plagiarism by them.
2. I have checked several articles using Grammarly plagiarism checker and most of them were below %40 and even then there were several sources.
3. If you do understand what summarization is then it is inevitable to have some percentage of plagiarism.
Larry Igna
Power Member
- Nov 25, 2016
- 663
- 715
1. Quetext sucks maybe, but it shows you from where it's copied. It said 95% , and i also checked by hand that is one on one copy-paste
2. 40% is not 95%
3. I do understand what summarization is, i understand (at least the basics) how it's done with machine-learning. Summarization => shorter version of the original, keeping only the essence.
When there is 95% match, you have no summary.
2. 40% is not 95%
3. I do understand what summarization is, i understand (at least the basics) how it's done with machine-learning. Summarization => shorter version of the original, keeping only the essence.
When there is 95% match, you have no summary.