7 replies to this topic

[thedude]

hello all,

does google ranks higher the websites that have more content?

thanks,
matt.

[torka]

No. Why should they rank a page higher simply because of the site is loaded up with content? Crappy, useless content doesn't deserve to rank higher simply because there's more of it...

If you have relevant, useful, well-written content and strong links with good anchor text pointing to that content, then your pages will probably rank more highly for more useful search terms than they would if you didn't have those things.

That said, with more pages of well-written content you of course have more opportunities to rank highly for a wider diversity of keywords. With more pages of useful content, you have the opportunity to create a richer system of internal links, and to attract a greater variety of inbound links from external pages. These types of things can help your pages rank more highly for more phrases, and generate more useful traffic to your site.

However, simply having more content -- without regard to the quality of that content and/or the links pointing to that content -- isn't particularly going to help you in Google or anywhere else.

My : It's a matter of quantity versus quality.

--Torka

[thedude]

but if the content are related to the keywords than it's ok?
what will happen if i'll copy articles from wikipedia?

this site does that: encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com
and he puts ads using google adsense... it seems like a great idea.

< live links edited. Please see [url=http://www.highrankings.com/forum/index.php?act=boardrules]Forum Rules[/url] >

Edited by chrishirst, 26 December 2005 - 03:54 AM.

[chrishirst]

welcome to HR thedude

it seems like a great idea.

Then do it. It's your site, your choice of content.

We have a lot of threads around on articles and duplication, do a forum search and have a read at them.

[Basoone]

but if the content are related to the keywords than it's ok?
what will happen if i'll copy articles from wikipedia?

If you want to do that you should inform the webmaster of wikipedia as a formality and to avoid penalty.

[thedude]

well thanks... now i just need the time to do it

anyway, articles in wikipedia *can* be copied, this is what it's all about (free as in freedom).

thanks again,
sorry about that link

[Randy]

Wikipedia articles can be copied, yes. However you still need to abide by their copyright restrictions --or in this case copyleft restrictions.

Partial copies need to contain reference back to the Wiki and credit the original author(s). They suggest with a link back to them.

Direct copies, which sounds more along the lines or what you're considering, requires a bit more.

You also cannot place any more restrictions on your usage of the articles than Wiki itself does.

The full Wiki copyright/copyleft documents can be found here in case you haven't yet read them.

[Jill]

what will happen if i'll copy articles from wikipedia?

Then you will have the same content that appears on numerous other sites. It's duplicate content, and it certainly won't help the search engines find YOUR site.

It will help the Wikapedia site though.