Comments on: Avoiding Duplicate Content: Exactly How “Unique” Do Your Spun (Rewritten) Articles Need to Be?

By: Ben

Ben — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 11:11:04 +0000

Paul does this mean your team of spinners99.9% of the time spin each article that is sent in to AT LEAST 70% unique as you just won’t get sucked into the Google abyss?

- Thanks

By: Paul

Paul — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 00:56:39 +0000

Thanks for your question, Ben.

Unfortunately, we cannot guarantee a specific percentage of uniqueness for our rewrites. This is because successful rewriting is a function of a number of factors: total article length; average sentence length; number of keywords included; topic of the article (articles that cite a lot of statistics or fact-based information are more difficult to spin); and overall quality of the original article.

And although 70% uniqueness is an “ideal” goal to shoot for, acheiving this in reality is quite difficult on a consistent basis. However, even 50% unique is likely more than enough (at least in my experience) to escape any duplicate content penalty. Remember, it’s also unlikely that the rewritten text is the only text that will be on the page, so this further decreases the level of uniqueness you need to acheive.

By: SEO Monkey

SEO Monkey — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 16:51:36 +0000

Interesting information. I was just wondering if anyone knew anything about the impact of using the blockquote and cite tags in order to reduce the duplication signature. A customer of mine has lots of sites with substantive quotation repeated across them.

One way to get them out is just to use images, but it seems logical that blockquote and site should work too.

By: Paul

Paul — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 03:20:42 +0000

SEO Monkey,

I believe this post from the “horse’s mouth” (read:Google) can offer you some guidance on what is and isn’t considered duplicate content:

http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2006/12/deftly-dealing-with-duplicate-content.html

Thanks, and hope this helps,
Paul

By: SEO Guru (Self proclaimed)

SEO Guru (Self proclaimed) — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 07:50:17 +0000

Again A good post, I have been wondering this myself. I used to visit copyscape and check some of the pages I had written about SEO, and too many times to count, the who article if not large portions of it would have been justed one other sites advertsing SEO services.

I used to write the the offending websites, and always would get nasty replies from them, so gave up.

It actually occured to me while reding about your service on your website the service you run could be well used for people that submit articles. Instead of submitting the same article 200 times to various article sites, wouldn’t it make more sense to get you to spin say 20 copies, and submit each one only 10 times the results in search engines be better.

I’ve been doing a lot of research on this, so could waffle on for ages… but again, very good post.

I’ve written to you privately before finding your blog, I’m really looking forward to working with you, I can certainly see a lot of uses for what you are doing…

Regards Lynny

By: Papers

Papers — Wed, 09 Jul 2008 19:11:22 +0000

Hi thanks for the nice articles..
I totally agree with you that The Duplicate content filter depends upon a lot of factors. It doesnt work simply like Dupecop that all articles below a certain level of uniqueness are filtered out. It depends upon the quality of surrounding articles, whether the suspicious articles are actually from one single site. A lot of papers have been published online on this.