"You cannot fulfill the 'human' and 'rank' functions TOGETHER with the same article. "

I have to disagree to some point with this. In the "old days" when keyword count was all that mattered to the search engines, this would be true. But now the search engines are more keen toward latent value of the content.

So the search engines are just as interested in finding good content with good information in it to display in their listings, as a reader would be in finding answers.

And this is the real point to all the algorithm changes Google makes. They want "organic" searches which they can display viable information for. They're wise to keyword stuffing and all the other gray hat SEO tricks. So they want the good stuff to show people.

This puts ranking on an even par with reader draw. So write for readers and the search engines will follow.

Ah, you bring up an excellent point:

Keyword stuffing and black hat techniques are bad ideas, certainly.

But keyword density will absolutely help.

The difference I am trying to indicate might make more sense in an example like this:

If you're trying to sell a self-help book, then these are two concepts:

1) You're writing for 'humans'... because you're going to get your article published somewhere where readers are. In that case, you might go with a title like: 'Life a like a bowl of cherries...'

This could bring the readers directly, because you're appealing to them with analogies, concepts, constructs, examples and so forth that draw the relationship to your theme.

But your theme, in this case, is 'self-help'... 'self help book'... 'helping yourself grow'... etc.

Google can't be expected naturally to understand the relationship on your page of 'self help' and 'book' to the following: 'bowl', 'cherries', 'life', or 'like.'


And that is where it matters what you're trying to produce, and how you use wording.

If someone searches Google for...?

self help book and self help (and you want to first check and see how many folks do search for these, before you bother to write a topic you aim to get organic ranking on), then you will absolutely want to make sure that your natural writing includes those phrases... and instances of those words... and clearly-related variants of those words... as often as you can (density). Yes, write naturally. But use the right wording. Minimize the examples and analogies; put those on the next page, or create a landing page that is meant to be optimized that opens to the next page, where you can then continue with ideas like 'Life is like a Bowl of Cherries' (this being the second page... the one you're not trying to optimize).

When you see cases where perfectly natural writing (non-optimized) is being ranked highly, it's usually because either the writer has struck on a theme that is quite unique in relation to the related searches, and strikes home directly. However, that's extremely tough to find a market for anyway... you might have a page like that as a reference on your site to help your readers see your expertise, etc.

But otherwise, what can drive that page to the top is the amount of traffic coming to it from... self-help blogs, directories, etc. Google counts that kind of traffic, if Google can SEE that take place.

This is why it's very important to use Google Analytics on your webpages, because that is the best way for Google to SEE where your visitors are coming from. If it SEES visitors coming to your 'Life is like a Bowl of Cherries' page from various self-help avenues, then Google can say 'oh, I see... this page has to do with 'self-help.'

And how Google knows THAT is by doing the math on the keyword density and other page checks for those incoming clicks.

Keyword stuffing, by itself, is a bad idea. Even if you get a spike in traffic as the robots first submit your pages, those pages will later be dropped like rocks from the front page of... basically anything.

Not all the time.

write articles in your own words, then the chance of approval will be maximum which automatically effects your result in terms or serp or backlinks

The ultimate issue is that any one webpage can only be optimized for a handful of keywords/keyphrases.

And Google does not like duplicate content, which causes the tendency to need to create content on the fly.

Yet, the websites that get the most traffic have the most pages, and by that, we mean 1,000's of webpages; more often, 10,000's and more.

We've been working on some intriguing methods to handle automate mass content creation at the touch of a button, while still working within Google's requirements of unique content, as well as not overloading (creating a great number of pages within a short period).

It's interesting to study this kind of thing.

For instance, if you're selling: 'the quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog', then someone can find you for a search on some of those terms (quick brown fox, lazy dog, jumped over)

... But, most folks don't know exactly what they're searching for when they start a search. So most of your market types phrases you don't have in play, such as 'fast fox', or 'rapid fox' ... 'sprang over' or 'leapt over'... 'tired dog' or 'exhausted mongrel.'

Ultimately, the most under-utilized, yet valuable, resource is the diversity lost when creating a page of content.

The way to deal with that is to learn how to use all the combinations that Google will want to crawl/index, to 'fill the holes' in phrase search types. Targeting mainstream keywords and keyphrases comes naturally when you have 1,000's of unique, keyword-optimized webpages (which can be generated overnight for anything, and sorted for uniqueness)... because all your pages will still carry the running themes (main keywords you're after) throughout.

Anyway, we've had some excellent fun with these models... it's fascinating stuff!

I took one website with about 450 webpages, and generated an additional 32,900 pages for them. The resulting visitor traffic was so pronounced that this company couldn't handle the new distribution channel demands. We actually had to TAKE DOWN the pages so that they could figure out how to upscale their customer service, embroidery machine and manpower, the number of folks they had to box the goods, and how to order their apparel from China in much larger shipments.

Wild how one thing affects another, at any rate...!

So Article Submissions can certainly do the trick, if organized into a massive, comprehensive folder structure where Google clearly understands the organization and can follow the logic (and the main keywords/keyphrases!!) from IB/OB page to IB/OB page.

For me, anyway... really interesting stuff!

Add your articles in website and promote from their by bookmark them and place the article address in different promotional areas.

well now backlick from article is almost dead.It doesnt help in getting PR but help to get limited visitors...

Backlink from articles still work as long as the content is unique and is not indexed as duplicate.
Its better to shuffle the title, content and anchor text as well.

Article should be with appropriate and amount of useful keywords and can be posted in social bookmarking sites for generating traffic

Articles are a great way to produce one way backlinks to your main site. You get higher vots with one way links.
Good luck!