Spin Comments, Not Articles?

I've been following discussions on bhw for some time and notice that difficulties with article spinning crop up rather often.

The two basic solutions appear to be hand-spinning, which works well but takes too much time and using spinning software but takes up virtually no time but usually produces a half-assed product.
Why not "spin" comments on articles instead of entire articles.

Almost anybody can come up with a dozen "introductons" to an article that should make the post pass muster with the search engines: For example:

1) I thought about this topic for days and can't believe how lucky I was to find this information! [insert unspun article with url];

2) I've thought about this thing and the author has some good ideas but I'm not too happy with it overall. [insert unspun article with url].

One would write longer comments but I think you get the idea.

Spinning comments is almost as fast as using software and almost as good as hand-editing each spun article. With a little experience you should be able to get a good idea of how long comments have to be to get the commented article to pass muster with the search engines.

Another possibility to to glue together two partial articles with two comments:

1) On the one hand it seems to me [insert paragraphs from article one with url, of course]. But then I read this and it seems good too! [insert 'graphs from article two] etc.

If spinning just the comments is working for you, then keep doing it. I think it is good to spin the article too though, google knows all.

When you say spin "Comments" then yes i spin comments when auto blog commenting. But the thing is, a blog comment is only a small portion of text so it's simple to tokenize it for spinning the lot.

An article though, is a larger body of text so spinning just an introduction doesn't do much for the article itself but it helps a little.

Kid Shaleen said:

Almost anybody can come up with a dozen "introductons" to an article that should make the post pass muster with the search engines

Click to expand...

Many people don't understand how duplicate bodies of text are treated by Google. Most say you must pass some % of uniqueness for an article which isn't really true.

It's treated more on a query level, if you and someone have the same article plus you have 2 extra words then someone searches a query with words from the article plus one of your extra words then chances are you will rank and the pages are still 99% dupe.

So providing unique "intros" will help rank different spun versions depending on the query it won't help a lot when the query is solely words/phrases within the article. When this happens all bets are off and the most authoritative one will typically be shown.

That's the reason for spinning the article throughout the body of text.

Generically adding to a duplicate article does not increase its uniqueness - the relevant part is still 100% the same after all - but splitting articles and adding them together definitely does work.

Spinning comments is a really great idea.

The most relevant sections in any article are the title, first and last paragraphs. Spin just those and you've done probably 90% of what's needed to pass.

At present the search engines are probably only looking at whole article duplication but there's no doubt that will soon become more 'granular'. I spin at the 4-word-block level - it's much more work but they always pass.

Spinning articles is a good way to do things. Just make sure, though, that the article will not look as if it is the same article. Change the title, the first paragraph and modify the body a little bit.

@freller - "4-word-block level" means chunks-of-words where each chunk is generally 4 words? Yes? No?

Robbygoalgoal said:

Spinning articles is a good way to do things. Just make sure, though, that the article will not look as if it is the same article. .

Click to expand...

Well, I think that's why you spin them

hatsoff said:

@freller - "4-word-block level" means chunks-of-words where each chunk is generally 4 words? Yes? No?

Click to expand...

Yes, literally changing at least one word in every 4 word block. That's about as tight as you'd ever need to get through any of the most common plagiarism testers.