From time to time I get the same keyword issues. Sometimes for words I wa not even trying to include. I simply extract or replace the keywords with a LSI related keyword or phrase.

EA is King when it comes to an article submission site so I've learned to just go with their changes and adapt.

Cheers,
Dean

I think you will find that this rule is enforced at different times, depending on the article itself.

If you write a GREAT article and your Keyword Density is a little high, they are not going to decline your article, but if the editor gets the feeling that you are trying to get one to many in on a subpar article they are probably going to kick it back.

I only say this from the studying I have done at EZA. The really good articles that get submitted literally get away with SEO MURDER lol and they should because the content they are providing is top notch.

hi Dustin,

This isn't true~

I just had an article published like a couple days ago and I only had 60 words

before the next long tail keyword came in and so far it has gotten 262 views

and 36 url clicks. Also if you look at other articles in EZA articles, there are

people more than 1/100 keyword/words per article.

"We do not accept articles that use excessive keywords or phrases. The keyword or phrase in violation is ---------. Please edit your article so that your keyword is not shown more than once per 100 words of your article body, and resubmit for review."

Steven you have made my day *hugs*. I have tried to write placing keywords in all the right places, nearly gone screwy almost ended up hating what I really love doing - writing. Plus I lose the 'flow' of what I am writing about and have to start over again. I have heard you, thanks for sounding like a broken record again - it's the first time I have heard it.

Jeremy K-

i didn't read your message, maybe that's why!

But does that mean if you get away with it, you are in fact illegally

VIOLATING their terms or service? - meaning if you end up making money

from clickbank, and if they find out, they are going to come and say, "you're

article shouldn't have passed and you're weren't allowed to recieve any

money from this - it is illegal so u need to refund it".

"lol

No, what I'm saying is, if you write exceptional content for EZA they will let you get away with a higher keyword density than the guy that is submitting subpar articles."

Ah I see, so this law doesn't apply:

"We do not accept articles that use excessive keywords or phrases. The keyword or phrase in violation is ---------. Please edit your article so that your keyword is not shown more than once per 100 words of your article body, and resubmit for review."

as long as you have good content!

I have articles ranked on Google's first page with the keywords in the title and resource box only. See, I found something interesting... wait for it... one more sec... OK, here it is: Google will edit out many words like as of in it, etc. when looking at keywords. This is important so listen up! Because of the filtering, you can write articles where the keywords are not all together and spammy looking. Do you see what I mean? If you don't, type 10 or 20 keyword phrases into Google's search engine and see how many results don't seem to fit quite right. Use this to your advantage. I hope I have not given too much away. For those of you who don't get it, don't worry, doesn't matter anyway, just me rambling...

TomG.

i wonder how a job at eza would be if they really could get rid of junk articles:

they should have a system where the workers judge A) Excellent B) Good C)

Below Average - and just cut out "below average" articles and tell the writer

to: sorry your article was not submitted, you need to further work on your

content. Try again.

They are so fussy because article marketing is so big and they are swamped with submissions. They feel you need them, they don't need you. They are getting a little too big for their britches.

Interesting comments all round. I feel better knowing someone else (Cali16) also has the same problem I do. Am trying to keep in mind the 'key' (no pun intended) places to place keywords, plus keep in mind not to repeat words and find alternatives.

Would you rather have your articles appearing on a top notch article site with a reputation for publishing quality articles, or a junk site full of poorly written articles with spammy content?? I think EZA are right to be strict and it will benefit everyone in the long run.

Check out Website-Articles.net Exclusive Article Submission Platform (not affiliate), it's run by a fellow warrior Allen Graves. You can have pictures and videos in your articles AND there's no adsense!

Nick

I believe that EZA enforcing this rule may save us all at some point. Maybe they even know something about upcoming Google algorithm/ranking changes that we don't. I think that EZA is protecting themselves for something BIG that's coming.

Why do I say so?

Well, it's the LSI thing, which enables Google to know what a site is about (the overall semantics), based on the co-occurrence of specific terms in a document. At the same time, it makes it easy for Google to see who wants it to THINK that the site is both

a) about a specific topic, and
b) important

purely by looking at overused keyphrase density and known patterns of 'good' SEO. Of course, logical placement of a keyword, like the title, is unlikely to be a problem.

As Google is concerned, it all comes down to providing the best possible USER experience. The average user expects the SE to 'know' what s/he means (semantics?) by an otherwise nonsensical search query. Semantic analysis enables Google to do just that. They didn't buy Applied Semantics for nothing...

Take this hypothetical query as an example: noisy dog miniature doberman shock collar

Using semantic technology, Google will be able to interpret with some (better than current?) degree of accuracy that the user is looking for an alternative to an electrical shock collar to stop a dog barking:

miniature doberman -> is_a -> dog
'shock collar' -> is_a -> device to stop a dog barking

In the same way, sites on that topic that have been semantically indexed can be offered as the 'best' match.

That should properly address the long tail for the most part - right now, Big G just guesses.

Of course, LSI can also be used to calculate a kind of topic-specific pagerank of sorts, where the weight of a backlink from a site that is semantically related to your site carries much more weight. This is of course in place already to some degree. I'm predicting that when Google is ready, it's going to be another beast entirely. One that may result in a whole new era of Google slap/smackdown of keyword 'spammers', who right now are just good SEO artists.

Now, can you imagine what would happen if EZA's top articles were to be slapped down to page 10 in the SE rankings? What would that mean to their business AND OURS? Of course Steven Wagenheim's articles would probably bubble to the top of the rankings because instead of repeating "dog training" to the point of nausea, his articles would have terms like "canine" and "man's best friend" and "behavior modification though positive reinforcement", etc placed in the text in a completely natural way.

Why do I think that Google will roll this out eventually?

Firstly, because only they can actually pull it off on an Internet scale AND more importantly, it will make for a far better user experience.

Secondly there is the 'threat' presented by the 'Web3.0'/Semantic Web movement. Their vision is to turn the whole Web into a semantic knowledgebase, so that a user can say something like:

"what is the best way to lose weight?"

and their engine understand the question and find the 'facts' that support an answer like (hypothetically):

"lower your caloric intake by X%, do Y amount of aerobic exercise and Z minutes of weight training per day and also take supplements A, B &C".

The SemWeb engine would understand the meaning of facts on a webpage and be able to extract what it needs to answer a query. Something like an intelligent web.

IMO, the Semantic Web movement is putting the cart before the horse and the vision itself if waaaay overly optimistic, while Google is approaching it exactly right. MAYBE Google will be able to pull off the SemWeb vision once LSI is mature and the accepted standard.

I apologize for the long post, but I think that EZA is protecting itself from something - and it's not just a case of making articles more readable. And we should take note. Perhaps if we approach the writing of our webpages and even blog posts in a more natural/less rigid 'SEO-like way, we don't get burned later. There is also a chance that we'll get the lion's share of targeted long tail traffic. Just like Steven

And no, I'm not saying that the sky is falling. Quite the opposite, actually. Especially since things should become a lot clearer in years to come. And I want more of that long tail!

Now if I can just convince my former colleague and business partner that we should resurrect our own semantic technology project for use in the 'coming SEO change' (HUGE leap of faith :p ) - could make for a new-era 'Google-goggles'...

This is what I try to do and it seems to work for me.

1. Write for people: Write naturally. Your articles should be interesting, informative and uncommon. Tell people something they don't already know. Entertain them, shock them, wow them, get them thinking, create curiosity and a desire to want more information from you.

2. Write for Google: Keep the theme of your article tightly focused around your keyword phrase. If you do this then 1% keyword density is plenty. Most of my first page Google articles these days are around 1% to 1.5%

3. Write for web site, blog and ezine owners: See point #1

4. Write for yourself: Don't try to make everything perfect. Have a little fun and enjoy yourself, it will come out in your writing.

Notice I said TRY. I'm definately not the most tallented writer in the house, but these four points are what I aim to achieve.

I have submitted close to 200 articles on Ezinearticles and I never heard about this before. Having too many keywords in a article is pretty weird. I have some articles that actually have the same keyword in the title TWICE and it went through OK..

Maybe this is a new policy that they just brought in.

We'll see soon.

Tal

I wonder how many people even know what their article's keyword density is when they submit it. I know I don't.