Talk:Keyword research

external link

The link to www.keywordresearching.com/compare.php is not within wikipedia best practices guidelines. It appears to be nothing more than paid, biased reviews with affiliate kickback links to some popular services. Recommend deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.135.62.211 (talk • contribs) 02:04, 26 May 2009

Keyword Discovery

I am new to Wikipedia and I'm trying to follow guidelines. I hope I'm doing so. I noticed that this Keyword Research page is not very detailed, in fact it was missing keyword discovery, one of the top keyword research tools. I have no affiliation with them and I'd be glad to add some information to a few of these keyword research tools when I find some citations. Again, I hope I did this correctly. Gustav38 (talk) 02:39, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Google Adwords Keyword Tool and Traffic Estimator

The Google Adwords Keyword Tool and Traffic Estimator was already in the list, I did not add it. However, the list is not backed up by citations, so I added a citation from the Content Marketing Institute where the article described the usefulness of the Google Adwords Keyword Tool and Traffic Estimator. Gustav38 (talk) 02:48, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Citations for keyword research list

I found and added a citation for Wordtracker and Keyword Discovery as sources of keyword research. It may be useful in the future to find additional citations for this list that are from a different source.Gustav38 (talk) 03:09, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Step By Step Keyword Research

Looking for evaluation/comments on a section titled "Step By Step Keyword Research" that is being repeatedly added by Prathamesh.landge (talk · contribs) (link: most recent addition of disputed content).

The material is a step-by-step how-to for establishing keywords for an SEO campaign. Such a section seems to go against the site policy WP:NOTHOWTO. In addition, the added material lists some tools that the author wishes to escalate above others, which seems to go against WP:ADVERT. Additionally, the ref being added by the user ([1]) seems to fail the criteria to be a reliable source - and the author of that ref has the same name as the editor here, suggesting they have a possible WP:COI with that source.

The material has been removed by two editors (including myself). I am starting a discussion here so that others can weigh in on the encyclopedic value of the added material. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:00, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

References needed

I tried to fill in a few and corrected outdated numbers but there are still a lot of passages all over the article without references. It begins in the first part, about "long tail keywords" for example. It's missing references almost everywhere — Preceding unsigned comment added by AllNicksBusy (talk • contribs) 00:07, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

I stopped working on the article, references get deleted faster than I can correct it. Not my beer anymore — Preceding unsigned comment added by AllNicksBusy (talk • contribs) 12:54, 5 April 2017 (UTC)