<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Recovering From A Google Penalty</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.eggrage.co.uk/recovering-from-a-google-penalty/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.eggrage.co.uk/recovering-from-a-google-penalty/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 12:42:39 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Temi</title>
		<link>http://www.eggrage.co.uk/recovering-from-a-google-penalty/#comment-411</link>
		<dc:creator>Temi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Jun 2008 14:20:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eggrage.co.uk/?p=43#comment-411</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the post, i think to that Keywords saturation, 
the main thing is that your keywords should be relevant to the site, describing it, there isn't a limit of use of it, as long as you don't spam or stuff keywords</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the post, i think to that Keywords saturation,<br />
the main thing is that your keywords should be relevant to the site, describing it, there isn&#8217;t a limit of use of it, as long as you don&#8217;t spam or stuff keywords</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://www.eggrage.co.uk/recovering-from-a-google-penalty/#comment-388</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2008 09:49:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eggrage.co.uk/?p=43#comment-388</guid>
		<description>Hi Sally,
Thanks for commenting! Excellent question, I should have mentioned that in the article. Generally speaking 5%-6% is considered ideal, and 10% or higher is considered spam. 

Hope that helps! :)

John</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Sally,<br />
Thanks for commenting! Excellent question, I should have mentioned that in the article. Generally speaking 5%-6% is considered ideal, and 10% or higher is considered spam. </p>
<p>Hope that helps! :)</p>
<p>John</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sally Lakeman</title>
		<link>http://www.eggrage.co.uk/recovering-from-a-google-penalty/#comment-387</link>
		<dc:creator>Sally Lakeman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2008 08:09:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eggrage.co.uk/?p=43#comment-387</guid>
		<description>Hi John,
Really great article, thanks very much for posting it.
Quick question, with regards to your point on keyword saturation, what percentage would you say is too high?  I have used the suggested site which was great but there wasn't much information on percentages and at which point it's too high.
Any information would be great.
I plan on implementing as many of your suggestions as possible and hopefully I'll see some positive results soon!
Thanks again

Sally</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi John,<br />
Really great article, thanks very much for posting it.<br />
Quick question, with regards to your point on keyword saturation, what percentage would you say is too high?  I have used the suggested site which was great but there wasn&#8217;t much information on percentages and at which point it&#8217;s too high.<br />
Any information would be great.<br />
I plan on implementing as many of your suggestions as possible and hopefully I&#8217;ll see some positive results soon!<br />
Thanks again</p>
<p>Sally</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ashley Baxter</title>
		<link>http://www.eggrage.co.uk/recovering-from-a-google-penalty/#comment-333</link>
		<dc:creator>Ashley Baxter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2008 10:39:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eggrage.co.uk/?p=43#comment-333</guid>
		<description>I've had a website be removed from Google entirely. It had top positions for several keywords, then *poof*! It wasn't too hard to have it re-indexed and was back on top (ethically) within no time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve had a website be removed from Google entirely. It had top positions for several keywords, then *poof*! It wasn&#8217;t too hard to have it re-indexed and was back on top (ethically) within no time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
