[tannhaeuser]

Why would content farms split their content into bite-sized chunks to appease LLMs in the first place? LLMs aren't quoting/referencing web sites they've scraped to come up with answers (hint: maybe they should be required to?), thereby destroying the idea of the "web" as linked documents. The crisis is about Google Search not bringing page views either, as a continuation of last decade's practice to show snippets or amp pages; or at least not to pages without Google Ads.

[timpera]

ChatGPT often provides links to sources in its answers after searching the web. Therefore, some people in the SEO world are saying that you need to split up your content into many small "questions" so that LLMs copy your answer to the question after searching the web and (hopefully) link to your website in the process.

I don't think that it is a good strategy, but it makes sense, especially for content that you want to be scraped (like product pages).

[jeremyjh]

If this is is why people are doing it, the SP isn't even addressing the actual question of effectiveness, because this isn't about manipulating the Page Rank algorithm its about getting results cited in LLM outputs.

[tacone]

Do we need some kind of standardized URL syntax (like # for anchor) to have browsers take you to the sub-content and highlight it?

[xnx]

> Why would content farms split their content into bite-sized chunks to appease LLMs in the first place?

SEO practices are mainly guesses and superstition. The principles of making a well structured website were known in 2000 and haven't changed.

[watwut]

> The principles of making a well structured website were known in 2000 and haven't changed.

But your well structured site will be ignored both by search engines and by llms. And that is all there is to it, really.

[trueismywork]

Almost all copyright licenses require attribution, so yes. They are required to refer to the sources