Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keyword density


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Bungle (talk • contribs) 14:36, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Keyword density

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Largely unsourced since at least 2013, and a key source provided is a now-defunct Forbes contributor which is not reliable per WP:RSP. This all could be a single line in search engine optimization. Zim Zala Bim talk 03:26, 6 March 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:31, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Advertising and Internet.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:55, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete, Not notable. Sean Brunnock (talk) 01:35, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep I don't think a single line would do justice to this or this or this etc., or any of the 11 Google Scholar searches using the term suggested on the first page of results. Although a Google Books search shows page after page of SEO-oriented books that talk about it, I think this article is best supported from the academic viewpoint because keyword density has many uses other than SEO, as evidenced by the G-Scholar works. It's a shame that the article isn't better, but the concept has significant and reliable sources in information technology and academia. I suggest marking the page as needing improvement. Lamona (talk) 04:46, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep. Lamona convinces me. Merge in Keyword stuffing while at it. Hyperbolick (talk) 09:37, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, Lamona has demonstrated that the subject passes WP:GNG. SailingInABathTub (talk) 22:54, 13 March 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.