Talk:Search engine prominence

reason for re-re inclusion
Hi, you can tell, I'm being persistant with this, mainly because I relly feel it should be included into wikipedia. I didnt come up with the term and i have cited references on the article - so please can this remain this time ...sepguy

reason for re inclusion
from the writer of the article: I work as a professional search engine marketeer and in order to explain the difference between optimisation i.e. stuff they can control and prominence whicih is stuff they can't directly control i came up with the term; search engine prominence.

normally I wouldnt feel that strongly about this issue except that for me and my clients it all makes complete sense. After all how much sense does link bait make ? All i'm doing is defining something which is not well defined at the moment. other related terms are linkbait, in linking, backlinking etc, but none of these deal with the core concept of search engines seeing one site as more important/prominent than another and ranking keywords accordingly..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sepguy (talk • contribs)


 * Please read WP:OR. Wikipedia is not for things you made up yourself. --- RockMFR 03:22, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Not standard terminology
"Search engine prominence" is not (yet) really standard terminology, so I wonder if an article is justified. A Google search on the phrase returns only 542 hits, compared with over 36 million for "search engine optimization" and over 23 million for "search engine marketing". Are there source references, or would this fall under (Wikipedia's policy against original research)? --IslandGyrl 22:32, 19 November 2006 (UTC)