Contents for GSA
My main keyword is "product name review". I tried main keyword in Konent Machine, I am not getting any contents. Message is "Not Enough Content”. My website is related product reviews. If I will put "product name" or "product name review" as my main keyword how can I get contents? If I am not getting contents form Konent Machine which keywords I can use instead of my main keywords? Please help me to clear this issue.
Comments
Try to go with more broad keywords maybe would be your best bet.
Thank you for your reply. Actually I stuck in GSA now. I set everything except contents. Which software is better to create contents? I need your advice, I should create contents exact main keyword or broad keyword for GSA?
I was just suggesting to use a broad keyword in kontent machine to scrape more results. You do want your content to be as closely related to your keywords as possible if you can help it.
You can check WAC and ACW. Both are good too. WAC has a GSA template. ACW's developer is working on it.
All three software are buggy in some ways, but they are all great.
1. foreign article lengths are too long
2. very few keywords get imported if any
3. importing categories are hit or miss
4. it's pulling in link codes for nuke instead of GSA therefore leaving %LINK% in your articles after they are posted
after switching back to KM, I've been checking the verified links and they are spot on
after switching back to KM, I've been checking the verified links and they are spot on"
WAC, I've found to have a lot of problems but I know they are working on it. One thing I don't like about WAC is they use their own spinner - I'd rather them allow access to TBS as it's spinning is better than what WAC gives.
ACW for the one time price is probably the best. But I'm still waiting for the GSA templates which should be out soon. Once it's out and it works well, I think I would rank it first. KM is still better slightly in terms of functions, but that doesn't justify the high monthly fees.
Anyway..Just saw that Kontent Machine has been updated and now u can use your own content along with scraped content..this is going to be really fun..I am going to do some site by site tests..I want to get human readable content which can pass copyscape..this way it willl increase your indexing rate without doing anything..I will let u know guys how this experiment goes.
Anyway, I'd be interested in your review on your website of the two programs. And I agree charging a bit of money would be good for collywobbles - I definitely wouldn't mind paying if it helps the development greatly. In the end, everyone benefits. However, I think KM's monthly fee is way too high though.
Senty and fullspeed, just to share how I use the programs so you can add to it and comment.
I used to pay an outsourcer under $10 to write a 500 words article then rewrite/spin every sentence between 1 to 3/4 times and then do word/phrase spinning. I thought that would have been a very good spin. And it's good and it reads well. But it costs a bit to do it for many sites.
Now, the way I do it above (all manual spinning) is good and it would most likely pass a human review if I get someone also to post it to Web 2.0s, etc. But the problem with that is that even though I've done between 1 and 4 sentence spinning and then word/phrase spinning, and even though it's more unique than just doing word/phrase spinning or even just one sentence spinning and then word/phrase spinning, it's still not hugely unique.
With ACW or KM, I can get about 30-100 sentence variations/spins/rewritings for each sentence! That's a huge piece of spin - I think using ACW sometimes I get a 200 page Word file! This is after running the article through an automatic word/phrase spinner. (Btw, KM now allows Spin Rewriter to do word/phrase spinning - something I was asking the developer constantly about - I like Spin Rewriter's High readability word/phrase spinning and prefer it to Best Spinner). So all in all, right now I'm getting a hugely spun article.
Of course this CANNOT be compared to the above method I mentioned (the one I paid my outsourcers to do) as the above method would produce a pretty readable article. But here's the thing, and feel free to correct me. Can google automatically detect this sort of spinning? I mean, if a human reviewer (either from Google or the Web 2.0 service) reads the article, it doesn't make sense coz it's many sentences spun together. So in that sense, it would fail a human review. I think because I use Spin Rewriter (or even TBS) and do auto spinning using the best readable setting, the sentences don't read that badly. But of course, there's no way it can be compared to manual spinning by a good outsourcer. But because of the sentence spinning, it probably can't pass a human review, but I don't think Google can automatically detect it's a spun article because it's very unique. Whereas, I do think my outsourcer's manual spinning, because it's less unique (by many many times as compared to KM/ACW's content - 1-4 rewrites for each sentence vs. 30-100! - could probably be detected by Google algorithmically, though will pass a manual review.
Anyway, here's what I'm finding. I'm finding that (as ACW's developer has shown - and if I"m not wrong he doesn't even use word/phrase spinning, just huge sentence spinning), my articles using ACW/KM are being indexed more easily because of the uniqueness. Yes, they are not exactly human readable the way I use the programs, but I'm not expecting a human review by Google, and I don't think Google can detect what I'm doing. Here's the thing, and I may be wrong but I think Google may be able to detect a bad word/phrase spinning (that's why I use high readability settings), but I don't think it can detect sentence spinning - i don't think it can see that there's no flow from this to that sentence which is what sentence spinning does (disrupts the flow).
All in all, it's much cheaper to just use the programs for my first tier. Yes, some web 2.0s may get taken down by the Web 2.0's human reviewers, but I can put a lot up because I don't have to worry about content.
Ok, so this is my thinking right now. I've love comments from you all. Cheers!
As you say, human readability is less likely as we are jumbling sentences up. I initially tried to only jumble up sentences from the same rough area of an article (eg 1st para, 2nd para) but it made no difference. So big sentence mashing it was from then on.
I have tried to do manual spinning .. I wrote 500 word
article and then rewrite para 3-4 times and then sentence spinning 2-3
times and then word spinning..this is really good spinning ..however I
think you can max use 30-40 times this article ..after that all article
starts looking similar..What I do now is if I am sure the site I am
promoting is for longterm project ..I go for this manual spinning [and
post only 30-50 web2s manually..this helps to stick your web2 longer..]
For
other projects [which is majority of my sites] I am trying to get huge
spun article which is human readable as well as can pass copyscape..for
this I use KM..I dont use sentence spinning ..just para spinning ..KM
can produce article with 20-30 para spinning...Then I use WordAI touring
spinner [if I am posting to my manual build web2 sites] or regular
wordAI if I am using GSA or UD..
KM generated content reads
better [and I am playing with new feature where you can use your own
content..hint hint I have access to article builder]...google loves
these articles and my indexing rate is around 10-20% without building
tier2..If I can increase this rate by using KM's new feature that would
be great..so I dont have to blast 1000 sites ..just go and get couple of
hundred sites and focus more on powering them up..