Talk:Google consultant

I don't understand why this page got deleted for spam - the term "Google consultant" is becoming widely used (in the UK at least) and distinct from SEO consultant - I did consider simply redirecting to SEO but thought that because SEO references "consultant" it would be better to give "Google consultant" a page of it's own.

The only external link is to a Google search - not any particular Google Consultant. My idea being that the best Google consultant in the world is going to be the one at the top of the list.

You can't call that spam.

well, it was not me who marked it, but you do not cite references in this article. you do not cite facts and use a lot of "mostly" statements. these are things which editors do not like. this article is also not "timeless" in that you do not take into account how long your statements are true. this article reads more like an advertisement in this sense, so even though you may something you believe to be true, and it generally is, you have not provided it in the format suitable to an encyclopaedia. also, the term is somewhat narrow minded and centers around a company. try putting some more effort into it and i am sure it could be better. Josh Froelich 22:21, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

speedy tag

I removed the speedy delete tag from this page, because it honestly doesn't seem to be spam (and the tag was placed by an anon anyway). I'm not sure we really need this article, the content could be included in the SEO article, but I will put an {{expansion}} tag on it. [[User:Lachatdelarue|Lachatdelarue (talk)]] 23:49, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Is the term "Google Consultant" really popularly used in the UK? I haven't seen many people in the US who refer to themselves at a "Google consultant," except for people who contract out to Google, and consult with them. Ok, I've seen just one of those. The Computer Science professor from the University of Maryland who worked on one of the duplicate content patents for Google with Monika Henzinger referred to himself as a Google consultant on his homepage. Bill Slawski 02:20, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merged to Search engine optimization

The content on this page appears to have been completely redundant with the main SEO article. Furthermore, this article is less accurate and has no references. I've boldly merged the article. Wikipedia isn't a dictionary. We don't need separate articles for each term if they can be explained satisfactorily by one article. Jehochman (^Talk/_Contrib) 01:28, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]