Talk:Search engine optimization

Suggested Merge of SEO Specialist into this article

The article SEO Specialist pretty much only describes what, how and why SEO is done but has the problems that it is an orphan and does not really use reliable sources. This article does a much better job at explaining all of that and does not have these problems. Therefore, i propose to merge the SEO Specialist article into this main article.

(I know that in some cases, it makes sense to have two articles (as for Architect <-> Architecture) but those are much bigger topics/articles.) Nyraxis (talk) 13:16, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

What would be the point of the merger, though? The SEO Specialist is a real job (plenty of job listings for it) and you'd still have the problem of not finding reliable sources for the content if it's merged into this article. It's not like there's a lot of Wikipedia-qualified reliable content about SEO anyway. There are no industry standards and most of what is written about SEO in the media is sensationalized nonsense. I think it might make more sense to interlink the articles or propose the deletion of the SEO Specialist article. Michael Martinez (talk) 13:29, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Redirect. I don't think there is any real value in the SEO specialist article. Each company decides what these roles do. Michael Martinez (talk) 15:06, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

• Merge (selectively). The overlap is huge, and the SEO specialist article is underdeveloped. Furthermore, since SEO Specialist is NOT mentioned at Search engine optimization, SEO Specialist could and probably should be viewed as a CONTENTFORK. For sure, it is an improper SPINOUT. Thank you, Michael Martinez, for proposing this merge! gidonb (talk) 04:25, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose Merge. The SEO Specialist article should stay separate from the main Search Engine Optimization (SEO) article. An SEO Specialist is a special job with its own tasks, skills, and career paths. This detailed information might be lost if merged. The SEO Specialist article gives clear information on job details, industry demand, career growth, and best practices. Improving this article with good sources and links to other articles is a better idea. Some users need clear information about the role of an SEO Specialist, which a separate article gives better. Merging could make the main SEO article too long and unclear. Separate articles allow for clear and focused content. The SEO Specialist article is a good learning tool for those who want to specialize in SEO. It gives focused insights and career advice. So, keep the SEO Specialist article as it is. It gives detailed information and stays clear for Wikipedia's users. Ibn Juferi (talk) 05:16, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

  I agree with this entirely. The collective term for a person who practices SEO is "an SEO". SEO is the the skillset and an SEO is practitioner. The SEO Specialist page needs to stay separate and it need to incorporate the differing titles within the SEO community such as SEO Executive, SEO Manager and SEO Consultant. All of these practice SEO but they are at different points in their SEO career. An SEO executive is typically a junior with 1-2 years experience whereas an SEO Consultant often has more than 10 years experience in the profession. MrMarky1982 (talk) 14:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

• Redirect. This is not a real article, it is likely AI-generated (GPTZero probability, 75%). It is an essay. The article title can be redirected and that will do the trick. As for the comments of the page creator (now blocked), Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a source of career advice. Dclemens1971 (talk) 21:30, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

  Going to a WP:BOLD merge/redirect here seeing a consensus. Dclemens1971 (talk) 16:05, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 September 2024

Masud27623657239 (talk) 12:14, 13 September 2024 (UTC)What Are Backlinks?

Backlinks are links on other websites that point to your website. In the world of (Search Engine Optimization), they’re like votes of credibility from other sites. The more high-quality backlinks you have, the higher your website is likely to rank in search results

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Charliehdb (talk) 14:34, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Proposal to Expand Section on Core Web Vitals in SEO

Hello,

I’ve been reviewing the Search Engine Optimization article, and I believe the section on on-page SEO techniques could benefit from an update. Given the recent emphasis Google has placed on Core Web Vitals as a ranking signal, this topic seems underrepresented in the current article.

Would it be worth expanding this section to include a breakdown of Core Web Vitals (Largest Contentful Paint, First Input Delay, and Cumulative Layout Shift) and their importance in modern SEO strategies? There’s solid research from sources like Google’s Web.dev and independent SEO research firms like Moz that could be used as references.

I’d be happy to help provide references and structure the update if the community agrees it would add value to the article. Looking forward to your feedback! Shahzaibahmadkhan (talk) 17:52, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

It would depend on the sources used, taking note of the spam warnings on your talk page. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:39, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Core Web Vitals is not a major ranking signal and it's only specific to Google. Search engine optimization is about managing the relationship between Websites and ALL search engines. There is no justification for including a section about Core Web Vitals in this article. It seriously needs clean up. Adding more Google-specific content that isn't even significant will just make it less useful. Michael Martinez (talk) 15:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)