Category talk:Search engine optimization consultants

This category is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles

Internet

This category is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles

Marketing & Advertising

This category is within the scope of WikiProject Marketing & Advertising, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Marketing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Marketing & AdvertisingWikipedia:WikiProject Marketing & AdvertisingTemplate:WikiProject Marketing & AdvertisingMarketing & Advertising articles

The presence of a "Search engine optimization consultants" category seems like a good way for SEO consultants to exploit Wikipedia as a SEO tool or, in the best case, a vehicle for their vanity. I suggest the removal of the entire category (from Wikipedia, not from Planet Earth...). 12.129.71.235 18:13, 9 February 2007 (UTC) Claudio[reply]

I suggest you login and sign your posts with ~~~~. You seem to be stereotyping all SEOs, which would be unfair and rude. As long as the people listed here satisfy WP:BIO, they should remain. Articles are occasionally added, and those that don't belong get deleted. The system is working fine. Jehochman (^Talk/_Contrib) 19:14, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One argument for having this category is to enable a link to it from the SEO article and thus avoid the need for a section titled =Notable SEO's=. That's what we had previously together with endless reverts with non-notable (redlinked and unlinked) names being added. —Moondyne 13:58, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a also a nice honeypot (computing) for catching spammers. Jehochman ^Talk 16:06, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm moving the SEO-related people into this category: SEO itself is starting to clutter. Cwolfsheep (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 22:47, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted this change to the description, and will remove this cat from the articles where it does not belong. We cannot have categories whose titles are complete misnomers, which this change creates. If you want to change the cat, first change the title via the process in WP:CFD (or, radical suggestion, create a new cat) UnitedStatesian (talk) 23:30, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems illogical to have Matt Cutts, who most certainly does not provide SEO services to companies (but is instead an engineer at Google's search quality team) listed here. (Randfish (talk) 01:23, 18 December 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Yes, perhaps we need a better title for the category. Can you suggest one? Search engine experts, perhaps? - Jehochman ^Talk 01:25, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a word that is more POV than "Expert"? That rename of this category is a terrible idea and almost guarantees a listing on CfD. UnitedStatesian (talk) 04:34, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How about "Professional", because it's their profession. Yes, I like that. - Jehochman ^Talk 04:36, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know another SEO consultant is not listed here... Why only a few Consultants are here I dont know. It ought to be a long list ((spam removed)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Webseos (talk • contribs) 12:57, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This catagory shouldn't just be experts on SEO, then it WILL become a list of links. It should be people who've advanced or had an effect on SEO. ((possible promotion removed)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Napper52 (talk • contribs) 04:05, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well I agree but, we should certainly add Brad Fallon, Andy Jenkins and Michael Guy's sites. I do not see where these guys that rank at the top of Google for SEO experts would not be SEO experts or consultants. As far as the requirements for being an SEO consultant, that would qualify anyone who has made a living at it. ((possible spam removed)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiexpert222 (talk • contribs) 04:43, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that individuals and companies that rank at the top of the SERPs should be added - basically, people with a proven record of success. After all, anyone can call themselves an SEO or online marketing consultant or something similar, but they have to actually have the skills to rank. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seogroup (talk • contribs) 16:57, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not true. SEO consultants who try to rank for seo are spammers. If they rank for seo expert that is another thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.117.189.130 (talk) 10:04, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

((spam comment removed)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fat-Controller (talk • contribs) 20:22, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

((spam comment removed)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:E35:2EEB:E740:5913:4009:71B0:6C15 (talk) 10:29, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]