| 7:44 pm on Mar 6, 2001 (gmt 0)|
Hey Kenny, welcome to WebmasterWorld -glad to have you join us.
Well, you're going to find different camps here on meta keywords and descriptions. I quit using them (but did not necessarily take down old ones) over a year ago. I have pages ranked in the top 10 of AV that don't have a single meta tag.
>I hear of software or places that will "submit your page to search engines for you". How do they do that?
The short answer: Not very well. Most of those require you to fill out some sort of site profile, listing title, descriptions, and keywords. None of those "Submit your site for $29" sites are considered worthwhile, and might even cause damage to your listings. I recommend that you hand-submit your own. Professional site submission and maintenance is another matter. We have many, many pros here that develop and oversee what are, in effect, SE-based advertising campaigns for their clients.
Some good places to dig in here; search on the terms "Thou Shalt Not" and "one-size-fits-all SEO"
Edited by: rcjordan
| 8:03 pm on Mar 6, 2001 (gmt 0)|
You'll find the search tool on these forums above the blue line at the top. It is in the *fine* print. And welcome! :)
I still use the meta description tag, because of all the metas, that is the most likely tag to actually be found and used by spiders. I actually have pretty good luck with that tag.
As for the meta keywords tag, I put it in to say that I have. I don't depend on that tag at all. I just do it because...why not.
Another good site search "themes". THAT'S where its really at.
| 8:13 pm on Mar 6, 2001 (gmt 0)|
I use the meta keywords tag as a record keeping device -- a very handy way to remember what words/phrases this page is all about.
I know if I ran a search engine I would get away from dependence on that tag as fast as I could, and most have, I would say. It's just too open to abuse. Let the algo decide what a page is all about -- the meta tag writer has too many reasons to distort the record.
| 9:37 pm on Mar 6, 2001 (gmt 0)|
I always build with tags for those services that read the tags. Those that don't, no worries.
As mentioned above, site content is the key to build a site theme - not the meta tags on their own.
Agreed on the autosubmissons - I wouldn't bother with those services. It won't take long for you to deal with the top ten services manually.
| 5:40 am on Mar 9, 2001 (gmt 0)|
Thx peeps for the input. one more question. I see that some engines say they will index your page for like $199. Is this worth it? Or should I just let time index a site?
| 6:24 am on Mar 9, 2001 (gmt 0)|
I assume you are speaking about Yahoo and LookSmart. Strictly speaking, they are not search engines but directories -- human reviewed, and not constantly refreshed by automated spidering.
In my opinion, both are very worthwhile. First of all, you will almost never get a commercial site into either one if you just wait. Second, the traffic boost can be powerful.
Yahoo can generate more traffic than anywhere else, and LookSmart can be nearly as strong, but the "LookSmart Effect" is harder to measure directly, since most of it comes through partner sites.
I'd say any site that will depend on search engines for even half their traffic should budget for these fees from the start.
| 6:44 pm on Mar 12, 2001 (gmt 0)|
Great advise! I just wanted to know if it is worth the money. From what you are saying, it would be a good idea then. Thx Tedster.