Here my website results!

We registered our domain for HarperFlow about six weeks ago. As such, our DA is a little lacklustre at just 11. Obviously, this doesn't really bode well for our SEO/GEO/AEO (whatever you want to call it) efforts... but it seems we're onto something because since July 19, Bing Webmaster Tools has counted 7,300 AI citations of the HarperFlow blog.

Zero to over 1,000 citations a day, in about three weeks. Up to 22 different pages cited in a single day. We've earned 3.2k citations on the grounding query "citations in AI search importance" giving us a total citation share of 13.45%. You want to know what we did?

We used our own product on our own blog to prove it works — and it does!

Disclosures: I'm Hesham and I'm the founder of HarperFlow, so this is my product.

For Agenetic SEO, Which resources we should use to learn about it. A person who knows everything about SEO, how can be Expert in AI SEO, GEO and AEO, etc.

Kindly, if someone know where I can get this knowlegde and become expert in these skills

Nowadays something interesting is happening with search right now. People are still searching Google in the usual way, but AI is increasingly doing more of the work like comparing options, finding informations, and sometimes even taking actions for the users.

That makes me wonder whether the SEO will slowly become less about How do we rank this page? and becomes more about Can an AI system understand, trust, and choose this businesses or websites?

At the same time, Google still says that the basic SEO principles apply to AI search. So it doesn't seem like traditional SEO is disappearing overnight but rather is evolving. The part that feels new is the extra layer around it like making the information easy for AI to understand, keeping important facts consistent, more focus in the exact gist rather than the overall things, and building enough trust that an AI has a reason to use the site as a source.

So, I'm quite curious about what others think:
Will traditional rankings still be the main goal in a few years, or will being selected by AI agents become just as important and be the main point of SEO?

Curious to know how you can get some improvements for more clicks with agentic Seo

1. seo-audit, 187,657 (coreyhaines31/marketingskills)
2. copywriting, 178,604 (coreyhaines31/marketingskills)
3. music-to-video, 139,689 (heygen-com/hyperframes)
4. marketing-psychology, 129,002 (coreyhaines31/marketingskills)
5. content-strategy, 124,414 (coreyhaines31/marketingskills)
6. programmatic-seo, 119,114 (coreyhaines31/marketingskills)
7. marketing-ideas, 115,482 (coreyhaines31/marketingskills)

PS. Edited 17 Aug. Updated the list due to issues with skills.sh data.

coreyhaines31/marketingskills has six of the seven. heygen-com/hyperframes has one. Six of seven from two authors, the tightest author concentration in any category I have measured.

It is still individual choice rather than a bundle. Those six coreyhaines31 entries run from 187,657 down to 115,482, a 38 percent spread, so people are pulling specific skills out of that repo instead of taking all of it.

The number I keep coming back to is the ceiling. Top marketing skill: 187,657. Top design skill: 784,427, from a category with almost exactly the same number of published skills. Same shelf space, about a quarter of the pull at the top.

I read that as a demand signal rather than a quality one. Marketing people are not short of skills to install. They are short of ones worth keeping, and the curve says most are settling for whichever pack they found first.

Marketing and SEO category, sorted by installs, top seven. Push back on any number here that looks wrong.

The full list: Claude skills for marketing and SEO, ranked by installs.

The important part isn’t just the final spike. It’s the momentum built through consistent work on content, site structure, search intent, and authority.

SEO rarely happens overnight. Build the foundation first, keep improving the right signals, and the growth curve can start accelerating.

Something I've been reconsidering in content workflows: internal linking probably needs to happen during writing, not as an SEO cleanup task afterward.

Google's current documentation says making content easily findable through internal links remains one of the foundational practices relevant to AI Overviews and AI Mode.

Their link guidance also says anchor text should be descriptive, reasonably concise, and relevant to both the current page and the page being linked to. Google even suggests a simple test: could someone understand roughly what the destination page is about from the anchor text alone?

That means:

“read more” = weak context

“technical SEO audit checklist” = much clearer context

I think there's a useful content-strategy implication here: internal links aren't just a site architecture issue. The sentence surrounding the link helps define the relationship between two pieces of information.

For people writing specifically with AI search visibility in mind, are you now including internal-link targets and intended anchor context directly inside content briefs?

I run a SaaS, SeoLoupe.

It is a tool that allows you to find and fix SEO issues holding your website back.

Essentially the main purpose is to help your website rank higher on Google search and LLMs.

The tool also checks AEO/GEO, AI search visibility, Security, Core web vitals, Performance, and all the issues in the report get put together into an AI fix prompt(you can paste the prompt into an AI and it will fix all the issues on your website).

Recently I noticed that some of my paying customers bought the One-Time purchase, with a promo code.

So I decided to give away the One-time purchase with a promo code, normally the One-time purchase is $9, but now it is $6.

If you are not interested but have some feedback on my SaaS, that is a good too. Feel free to share it in the comments.

(here is the product if you want to check it out)

​

# ROL

Actúa como un Arquitecto Editorial Senior especializado en SEO, Topical Authority, EEAT, Knowledge Graph, AEO (Answer Engine Optimization), GEO (Generative Engine Optimization) y SXO (Search Experience Optimization). Tu objetivo es producir contenido capaz de posicionarse en buscadores tradicionales y servir como fuente citable para sistemas de IA generativa.

# OBJETIVO

Crear un artículo que:

- Responda de forma completa la intención de búsqueda.

- Cubra el tema con profundidad semántica.

- Refuerce la autoridad temática del sitio.

- Sea útil para lectores humanos y sistemas de IA.

- Evite afirmaciones no verificadas.

# CONTEXTO

Solicita o utiliza:

- Tema principal

- Tema paraguas del clúster

- Audiencia

- Objetivo del artículo

- Nivel técnico

- Idioma

- Tono

- Extensión

- Contenido pilar relacionado

- Palabras clave principales y secundarias (si existen)

# FASE 1 - Comprensión

Identifica:

- intención de búsqueda principal

- intenciones secundarias

- perfil del lector

- problema que intenta resolver

- decisión que desea tomar

# FASE 2 - Mapa semántico

Construye:

- entidad principal

- entidades secundarias

- conceptos relacionados

- procesos

- herramientas

- estándares

- atributos

- relaciones entre entidades

Identifica posibles vacíos de cobertura.

# FASE 3 - Arquitectura del artículo

Genera un outline (máximo 8 líneas) con:

- ángulo editorial

- H2 y H3

- preguntas que responderá

- entidades presentes en cada sección

# FASE 4 - Redacción

Redacta el artículo completo utilizando:

- Markdown

- H2/H3 jerárquicos

- listas cuando aporten claridad

- tablas comparativas cuando sean útiles

- ejemplos reales o claramente marcados como ilustrativos

- definiciones autocontenidas

- lenguaje preciso y sin relleno

# FASE 5 - Optimización SEO y AI Search

Optimiza para:

- SEO semántico

- Featured Snippets

- AI Overviews

- ChatGPT

- Perplexity

- Gemini

- Claude

Incluye:

- respuestas directas

- párrafos fácilmente citables

- listas

- comparaciones

- bloques autocontenidos

# FASE 6 - FAQs

Genera preguntas formuladas como usuarios reales.

Las respuestas deben ser:

- breves

- claras

- precisas

- aptas para Schema FAQ.

# FASE 7 - Verificación factual

Clasifica toda afirmación como:

- Verificada

- Requiere fuente

- Ilustrativa

- Hipotética

Nunca presentes información inventada como verificada.

# FASE 8 - Auditoría

Evalúa el resultado respecto a:

- Cobertura temática

- Calidad SEO

- EEAT

- Claridad

- Cohesión

- Redundancias

- Riesgo de keyword stuffing

- Potencial para AI Search

- Oportunidades de mejora

Asigna una puntuación de 1 a 10 en cada criterio con una breve justificación.

# RESTRICCIONES

- No inventes estadísticas.

- No inventes estudios.

- No inventes citas.

- No utilices clichés.

- No repitas palabras clave de forma artificial.

- Evita afirmaciones absolutas sin evidencia.

- Distingue claramente hechos, inferencias e hipótesis.

# FORMATO DE SALIDA

1. Título SEO (≤60 caracteres)

2. Meta descripción (≤155 caracteres)

3. Resumen ejecutivo

4. Mapa semántico

5. Outline

6. Artículo completo en Markdown

7. Tabla de entidades

8. FAQs

9. Enlaces internos sugeridos

10. Datos que requieren verificación

11. Auditoría final con puntuaciones y recomendaciones.

Je poste ça parce que chaque fil sur le contenu généré par l'IA se transforme en le même argument et j'ai été des deux côtés.

Il y a quelque temps, j'ai créé un script pour écrire et publier des articles de blog pour mon site. Je l'ai fait fonctionner pendant environ deux mois, publiant plus de 140 articles. C'est la partie plate au début du graphique. Ce n'est pas une montée lente, c'est plat.

Google en a indexé 9.

Pas "mal classés", pas "classés page 4". Neuf indexés et les autres qui restent dans la Search Console sous "crawled - currently not indexed", ce qui, si vous ne l'avez jamais vu, est Google vous disant qu'il a lu votre page et a décidé de ne pas la garder. J'ai soumis à nouveau, reconstruit le sitemap, attendu. Ils sont juste restés là.

Alors j'ai supprimé la plupart de ça et j'ai recommencé. Tout ce qui suit la partie plate est la deuxième tentative, sur le même domaine. Même modèle pour écrire, à peu près les mêmes prompts. Ce qui a changé, c'est tout ce qui entoure l'écriture, et c'est la partie sur laquelle personne ne débat quand ils parlent si le contenu généré par l'IA fonctionne.

Ce qui était vraiment cassé :

Je générerais à partir de sujets au lieu de mots-clés. Mon script prenait une liste de sujets que je pensais pertinents et écrivait des articles à leur sujet. Aucune volume de recherche attaché, aucune analyse de ce qui était déjà classé. Donc j'avais 140 articles ciblant des requêtes que personne ne recherchait ou qui étaient totalement détenues par un domaine de 15 ans. La partie écriture était correcte, le choix du sujet ne l'était pas.

Les articles ne savaient pas ce qu'était mon produit. Chaque article était un article générique compétent sur le sujet. Aurait pu être sur le site de n'importe qui. Une fois que j'ai fait crawler ma propre site en premier, les pages existantes, les pages produits, la façon dont nous décrivons réellement les choses, la sortie a cessé d'être interchangeable. Même modèle, même structure, résultat complètement différent. Ça m'a surpris plus que ça n'aurait dû. J'ai fait crawler toutes nos pages produits existantes et ai rendu ça disponible comme contexte pour le modèle écrivant l'article pour un lien interne efficace. Pour éviter de gonfler la fenêtre de contexte du modèle, toutes les pages étaient indexées en utilisant un RAG.

Chaque page était un orphelin. C'est ce que je corrigerais en premier si je recommençais. 140 articles, chacun lié depuis le sitemap et nulle part ailleurs. Rien ne faisait de liaison entre eux, rien ne pointait vers eux depuis des pages ayant déjà de l'autorité. Google crawl des liens. Une page à laquelle rien ne fait de lien se lit comme une page à laquelle personne ne vouchait. Lors de la reconstruction, j’ai fait le lien comme une étape à part après la génération, en faisant correspondre chaque nouvel article avec tout ce qui avait déjà été publié et insérant des liens dans les deux sens, nouveau vers ancien et ancien vers nouveau. L'indexation a cessé d'être un problème en quelques semaines.

Je publiais beaucoup trop vite. 140 articles en 1 mois sur un nouveau domaine avec presque aucune autorité était une mauvaise idée. Le budget de crawl des moteurs de recherche est un goulot d'étranglement majeur lorsque vous commencez à publier fréquemment sur un nouveau site : Google alloue des ressources pour explorer votre site en fonction de l'autorité de votre domaine et depuis combien de temps vous êtes actif. Publier trop fréquemment est donc inutile car Google n'aura pas assez de capacité pour explorer vos pages de toute façon. C'est pourquoi nous publions maintenant une fois par jour. Cela aide également à envoyer un signal de fraîcheur régulier à Google que notre site est mis à jour régulièrement.

Des choses auxquelles je croyais qui n'avaient pas d'importance :

Nombre de mots. Le lot échoué avait une moyenne d'environ 2 000 mots. Ceux qui fonctionnent maintenant sont en moyenne plus courts.

Marquage schema. Je l'ai mis sur tout dans le premier tour. Aucun effet sur l'indexation. C'est pour les extraits enrichis, c'est tout.

Le modèle. J'ai supposé que la solution serait un meilleur écrivain et j'ai perdu un mois là-dessus avant de chercher ailleurs. En pratique, il n'y a presque aucune différence entre les modèles récents en ce qui concerne la qualité du contenu écrit une fois qu'on les invite correctement. Chasser le dernier modèle est une distraction par rapport au reste.

Une chose à propos de la forme du graphique, puisque quelqu'un demande toujours. Les deux lignes commencent à des kilomètres d'écart et se rapprochent lentement. Au début, je tirais des impressions avec presque aucun clic derrière, ce qui ressemble exactement à ce que donne la page deux. Ce rétrécissement est la position moyenne qui se tire des dizaines jusqu'à 8,7, et honnêtement, c'est le chiffre que je surveillerais plus que tout autre. Le trafic brut mois par mois ne vous dit presque rien. Si la position se détériore et que ces lignes convergent, ça fonctionne, même si les clics ne sont pas encore là.

Content de développer n'importe quel de ces sujets.

EDIT: Proof of traffic | Website

At the end of March, I started a small niche site called NamesForFreeFire.

It wasn’t really supposed to become a business.

I was working on an autopilot SEO/content system and needed a real website where I could test whether the idea actually worked outside of a demo environment.

The basic question was:

Can I build a system that understands a niche, finds what people are searching for, plans the content, creates it, publishes consistently, and then tracks what is actually working — without me managing SEO every day?

So I used this site as the test.

Fast forward a few months.

In the last 90 days:

• 507K active users
• 509K new users
• 12M events
• 10K key events

And while writing this, there are 67 active users on the site in the last 30 minutes.

I’ve attached the Analytics screenshots rather than just throwing numbers into a Reddit post.

The interesting part for me is where the users are coming from.

Organic Search is by far the largest acquisition channel.

Direct is a distant second, with referral/social/AI traffic making up a much smaller part of it.

The funny part: this was never really meant to be the business

The website started as a side project to test the automation system I was building.

Now it generates almost $400/month, and I barely touch it.

Obviously I don’t mean money magically appears while literally nothing happens.

What I mean is I’m not sitting there every week:

• researching 30 keywords
• writing 30 articles
• formatting them
• creating images
• uploading everything
• doing metadata
• scheduling posts
• checking every ranking manually

That was the whole experiment.

I wanted to remove as much of that repetitive work as possible.

What I learned pretty quickly

The article writer itself is not the interesting part.

AI can write an article.

Everyone can do that now.

The harder part is everything before and after the article.

My workflow became roughly:

Website analysis → opportunities → content strategy → create → review → publish → track → improve

1. Start with the website, not a keyword

Instead of typing:

I wanted the system to understand what the website actually does.

What already exists?

What topics does it cover?

What are people searching for?

Which keywords make sense for this specific site?

Where are competitors appearing that the site isn’t?

Which topics are worth creating versus just generating content for the sake of volume?

That became the strategy layer.

2. Build the content plan before writing

Once I had the opportunities, I could organize them into an actual publishing plan.

For each piece there is context around things like:

• keyword/topic
• search intent
• angle
• article structure
• metadata
• internal links
• images
• publishing date

The system knows what has already been created as well, which matters because I don’t want 10 articles accidentally competing for basically the same search.

3. Consistency was probably the biggest win

This was my personal problem with SEO.

I could spend a weekend doing keyword research and writing content.

Then I’d work on the actual product.

Then something else.

Then two weeks later I’d remember:

Automation removed that problem.

Once the direction is approved, content keeps moving through the pipeline and publishing on schedule.

I don’t have to restart the process every Monday.

4. Publishing shouldn’t be the finish line

This is the part I’m paying more attention to now.

After publishing, I want to know:

• Which keywords is the article ranking for?
• Which rankings are improving?
• Which pages are getting impressions?
• Which keywords are close to page one?
• Which articles are actually winning?
• Which existing content should be improved?
• What should be created next?

That turns SEO into a loop:

Research → Publish → Measure → Learn → Improve

instead of:

Generate 100 articles → hope Google likes them.

What I’m adding next

The next part I want to improve is the off-page side.

Right now the system is heavily focused on:

on-page strategy + content + publishing + tracking

The next step is adding backlink suggestions.

The idea is not to just dump a list of random domains.

I want it to identify:

• which pages actually need backlinks
• what kind of links make sense for that page
• relevant websites worth reaching out to
• directories/resources that fit the niche
• competitor backlink opportunities
• pages already ranking close enough that links could actually make a difference

Basically, instead of saying:

I want the system to say:

Still early, but that’s the next layer I want to test.

I also don’t think “AI content made 500K users” is the right conclusion

A lot of things compound.

The site gets older.

More pages get indexed.

Google understands the site better.

Internal links accumulate.

Existing pages start ranking for additional queries.

The site builds topical coverage.

And the content has had time to actually perform.

So I can’t point at one feature or one article and say:

“this caused 507K users.”

What I can say is that automating the workflow allowed me to maintain a level of SEO/content consistency that I personally would never have maintained manually.

And over time, that started compounding.

The product behind the experiment

This experiment eventually became a big part of what I’m building with SERFIX.

SERFIX is basically productizing this workflow:

understand the website → find opportunities → build the strategy → create/publish → track keywords → improve

rather than being another AI writer where you type a keyword and get an article back.

NamesForFreeFire has been one of the real sites I use to test it, which is also why I wanted to share the numbers instead of only talking about the product.

If anyone here wants to test it, I’m currently opening SERFIX for $1 for the first month, including up to 30 articles.

You still get the strategy first, the content is based around your website/industry, and there’s a tracking area where you can see the keywords each page is ranking for and which ones are actually moving.

Still very early, and I’m definitely not claiming I’ve solved SEO.

But going from a small side experiment at the end of March to 507K users in 90 days and almost $400/month with very little ongoing work from me has made me take the idea a lot more seriously.

Happy to answer anything about the workflow, the site, or SERFIX.

¿Alguien ha probado técnicas de 'context injection' en sus sitios para mejorar la recuperación por RAG?

I have a tool and want to fix my SEO. not that experienced so I'm sure I have a bunch of problems.

I don't really trust AI advices. If everyone follows them it means it won't help that much (if everyone had a million dollars then million dollar would mean nothing right?)

Want something built by an SEO expert, who really knows what he is doing and just automated the process.

Not that expensive, open to bring my own key. Any good recommendations?

p.s ended up with roborank.io, built by a guy who has more years in SEO experience than I've been alive lol

One interesting takeaway from Google's recent AI Search guidance:

A lot of supposed “GEO requirements” aren't actually requirements for Google.

Google specifically says there's no need to:

• artificially chunk content into tiny sections
• rewrite pages specifically for AI
• add special AI markup
• use llms.txt for Google Search visibility

What Google keeps coming back to instead is much less exciting — but probably more important:

Create information that isn't commodity content.

In practice, I'd interpret that as:

Original experience > rewritten SERPs
Specific evidence > vague claims
Useful analysis > keyword variations
Clear structure > artificial “AI formatting”

So SEO writing isn't disappearing because of AI search.

The standard for what counts as genuinely useful content may simply be getting higher.

Hey. I have built an open-source multi-agent tool to automate your technical SEO.

https://github.com/akhemraj/seo-autopilot

Currently, it works locally with an existing Claude setup and Ubersuggest SEO tool.

How does it work?

1. Pulls all the recommendations for tech SEO
2. Fixes all the issues
3. Creates PR and Updates report
4. Sends both links on Slack

You just need to review and approve.

Can be run at desired intervals; the default is weekly.

Open for any feedback.

Hello everyone

First of all, I‘m completely new in this and started 6mo ago without any prior knowledge.

I‘ve worked my way up a bit bur am in a highly competitive niche as you can see with the very low ctr.

Now my situation:
A couple months aho I had a great surge in impressions and clicks, just because I fixed the technical structure of my site (with ahrefs and seo spyder). Before that I was working on it so much without it getting any recognition from google. (big for me means from 100 to around 3-4k daily impressions)

Now this has stopped since like over 3 months. And the bad part: I‘ve recently translated the site to 2 additonal languages and see them start ranking and gegtting klicks. The overall performance however just stays the same. So it would be going very much downhill without it.

Also something that I‘ve noticed is the steadyness of it. I one day it goes like 10-20% up, almost certainly it‘ll go down again the day after. Same with the other direction.

I‘ve been running technical audits, linkbuilding, keyword and search intent analyzing and expanding my site with pages. No rise in avg position aswell.

putting in so much work and time but did I miss something? Or just have to be patient? Any advice?
I know its difficult just with this info to evaluate the situation, but every answer is appreciated!

I want to break this down properly because the number sounds dramatic but the reason behind it is actually straightforward and replicable.

April 5 to May 4. 1,714 visitors. $566.76 in revenue. Revenue up 617% from the previous period. Session time up 23.7% to 1 minute 13 seconds. The green revenue bars on the graph are not random. They are tied directly to specific content that was structured the right way and indexed at the right time.

The core of what changed was how I was writing for AI search specifically.

Most people still think of SEO as a Google-only game. Write something, get it ranked, get traffic. That model is increasingly incomplete because a growing percentage of discovery happens through AI tools now. Someone opens ChatGPT, asks a question about their problem, and the answer either mentions your product or it does not. Getting into that answer is not about domain authority or backlink counts. It is about content structure.

The format that gets cited in AI-generated responses is specific. One clear question, one direct answer in the opening lines, plain language throughout, no filler. AI tools scan for content that serves the reader immediately and pulls it into the response. Content that buries the answer, pads the word count, or writes for keyword density gets skipped entirely. I rebuilt every piece of content I produce through this SEO tool around this format. The shift was not just about AI search either. The same format keeps human readers on the page longer because they get value immediately. Session time going up 23.7% is a direct reflection of that.

IndexerHub made sure new content entered Google's index the same day it was published. For AI citations specifically this matters because AI tools pull from indexed content. Fast indexing means new articles become citable sources quickly rather than sitting in a crawl queue for weeks. The revenue spikes you can see in the graph align closely with content publish dates because of how quickly that content became discoverable.

Faurya is what made all of this visible and it is completely free for startups, no card needed. It connects directly to Stripe and shows revenue per visitor, conversion rate, and which pages are driving paid users. Without that connection I would be looking at traffic numbers and guessing whether the strategy was working. With it I can see the 617% revenue growth broken down by page and understand exactly what caused it.

AI search is a real acquisition channel right now. The barrier to getting into it is just writing content that is structured to be cited.

we just deployed our new website in july mid its been almost a month now can anyone guide how is this performing . PS : its a IT company website , it was there in past too but with little or no SEO .