Does quality really matter on Web 2.0s?
- Thread starter samiejg
- Start date
ID Internet Marketer
Senior Member
- Jan 22, 2013
- 939
- 1,444
no, at least unique + readable and seo optimized
but if you have budget go for it
but if you have budget go for it
Los Angeles SEO Agency
Power Member
- Sep 2, 2012
- 738
- 350
Hey OP,
Make the sure content is readable and and has grammer that makes sense and doesn't look auto-generated.
Also it is not only Google you have to worry about, but also tumblr, weebly and wordpress, because best believe they flag web 2.0's that look spammy.
Best of luck!
SDSEOGURU
Make the sure content is readable and and has grammer that makes sense and doesn't look auto-generated.
Also it is not only Google you have to worry about, but also tumblr, weebly and wordpress, because best believe they flag web 2.0's that look spammy.
Best of luck!
SDSEOGURU
jascoken
Senior Member
- Nov 1, 2010
- 1,135
- 753
Any content that direct-links to money-sites or valuable assets should be treated as high-quality, and should pass a manual inspection. This helps prevent the possibility of manual penalties (but not if the links are from proven/historical volume-linking/spammy sites.)
If you're talking tiers-deep with no direct-links to any valuable/non-replaceable asset, then super-spun content is fine; although you should ALWAYS make it readable. I'd never risk low quality content pointing at any asset that has taken work to build and manage, but if it was for helping to index tier 2+ comments etc, it doesn't really matter.
If you're talking tiers-deep with no direct-links to any valuable/non-replaceable asset, then super-spun content is fine; although you should ALWAYS make it readable. I'd never risk low quality content pointing at any asset that has taken work to build and manage, but if it was for helping to index tier 2+ comments etc, it doesn't really matter.
Quality does not really matter if you just want links. But you should think about it in the long term - if you are going to be creating a lot of sites in similar niches, then it would make sense just to use one Web 2.0 account right ? so that you save a lot of hassle. If that is the case, then wouldn't you want to try to make it as nice as possible, because whenever you are adding a quality post or article to it, the whole property gets a lot stronger in the long run.
pixxelhouse
Regular Member
- Aug 8, 2013
- 429
- 26
Quality article Links are the very Important to your site ..
if your keyword is not extremely competitive, you dont need quality since noone is going to review it manually. Now, you still may need it to read ok because the web2 provider may disable it if it is crap. But still it is unlikely.
Just have a custom theme (zen) and some spun content and some images ant it will pass every time. Also avoid posting links in your first 5 posts.
Just have a custom theme (zen) and some spun content and some images ant it will pass every time. Also avoid posting links in your first 5 posts.
content is king, having said that you have to decide on buying new article or taking article from internet and spinning it depends on the below factor:
Use old article taken from internet and spin it and use it in web 2.0 properties, if
1. your site is new and don't have any backlinks
2. If your site don't bring any revenue now, so if something goes wrong you won't lose much
3. you are not invested fortune in your site, like $$$ of webdesign , marketing etc
Use old article taken from internet and spin it and use it in web 2.0 properties, if
1. your site is new and don't have any backlinks
2. If your site don't bring any revenue now, so if something goes wrong you won't lose much
3. you are not invested fortune in your site, like $$$ of webdesign , marketing etc
SquirlyNutz
Power Member
- Feb 20, 2009
- 721
- 541
Unique quality articles is key.
Ugh. Bad thread, the chances of google manually reviewing your web 2.0s are close to zero as long as your anchor text, link velocity, and link diversity are in order. Maybe in the future, but PBNs would be in serious jeopardy if that were the case now. The reason why you want quality in your web2.0s is so they aren't deleted.
ContentWriter
Banned - Selling via PM
- May 8, 2013
- 5,735
- 975
If you're on a budget, you DO NOT use spun articles. You save up so you can afford high-quality articles.
If you post spun content on your website, whether it's web 2.0 or web 2,000,000.0 or whatever number that comes after it, that's almost similar to letting a retard write articles for you.
The quality of your content DOES MATTER, regardless if your site is being manually reviewed or not. The rule of the universe is so simple. Do you reap mangoes when you plant tomatoes?
Kikerinka
Elite Member
- Dec 18, 2010
- 2,584
- 9,443
People who use original content on web 2.0 will say it matters, people who use spun content there will say it matters not. Do you know why? Simply because everyone believes his own method... and supports it.
Of course, people who offer content writing services will always say all articles must be unique...
The truth is - your articles on the web 2.0 doesn't have to be superb original or totally unique. But if you believe you rank your money site if your web 2.0 are about one-click-robot-spun-crap, then you are very wrong.
Give it some hard work, it will pay of at the end.
Of course, people who offer content writing services will always say all articles must be unique...
The truth is - your articles on the web 2.0 doesn't have to be superb original or totally unique. But if you believe you rank your money site if your web 2.0 are about one-click-robot-spun-crap, then you are very wrong.
Give it some hard work, it will pay of at the end.
If you're linking web 2.0 directly to your money site, then you need to stick on quality unique contents. If you're not directly linking your money site with web 2.0, then you need not to keep up with quality, but make sure that the article is readable and unique.