Forum Moderators: open
Good results? Same-old same-old?
Let us know, please.
For example, please don't violate the rules of this forum by again dropping some company's URL.
You are happy you deoptimized, fine. THAT is the thread topic. When you post a terrible idea and promote some company to boot, you should expect to get people pointing out how they disagree, and how more sensible actions are a better idea.
I am saying it is not a terrible idea and explaining why my experiences bear this out.
[edited by: Dave35London at 12:53 pm (utc) on Jan. 19, 2004]
There is no such thing. It is an oxymoron, and betrays a lack of understanding what optimization is.
Optimization is simply putting your site in the most favorable light, and news flash, what did that two months ago may not be the same thing as today (although it may).
Sensible optimization is to... optimize. You find the most favorable combination of ingredients/tactics/tools/practices. Some of these tactics are more important one month than the next. A tactic that worked three years ago may be useless now.
Optimization also can be seen two ways: true optimization or spam optimization. The first doesn't violate the quidelines, and is therefore truly optimizing. Spam optimization is to use tactics that work, but violate the guidelines. This is really pseudo-optimization. Some folks here tried dodgy tactics that don't work anymore. Undoing dodgy tactics is not de-optimizing but rather bringing a site into compliance with the guidelines. One thing that works very well now is coordinated anchor text and H1 tags -- especially the H1 tags part.
Everything that worked pre-florida that was within the guidelines continues to work, and work very very well, post-florida. Straightforward, guidelines compliant tactics working together rule the serps. (That's not to say some folks who do everything right won't get ranked poorly along the way for any number of reasons.) Coordinated optimization works. Some things, like targetted anchor text, are a bit less important than before, but it still is extremly important.
Authoritative sources have suggested dropping your keyphrase from your title might be beneficial if your anchor text is also heavily laden with text.
For me doing this looks optimal.
Steve seems to think you should always be prominent in the title for your desired phrase come what may.
I had a domain called keyphrase.com title keyphrase blah blah blah, optimal page link and body counts and densities and I amended the title, I never had H1 text in the first place.
I believe the title amendment may have been beneficial. Steve thinks it is a golden rule that the title must always have the targeted phrase prominent.
I and other authoritative sources speculate and empirically observe that if everywhere else is pointing heavily at your phrase including very heavy anchor text optimization it can be beneficial to drop the phrase from the title.
Examples
custom widget --> customized widget
custom widget2 --> personalized widget2
etc.
I have found that I dropped for most of my 2 word pharses but am now popping up #1 for almost all my 3 word phrases
Examples
custom birthday widget
customized birthday widget
personalized holiday widget
etc
etc
etc
Use your common sense and if it sounds right when you read it yourself then its ok.... You hope.
When we have KW1 and KW2 as our main keywords we shoul use it once in title OR url. In polish google i see that pages with Title "KW1 KW2 blablabla" and with url like http://example.com/KW1_KW2.html are lower in serps than pages with low PageRank but KW1 and KW2 only once in title or url. Both pages are using h1 tags all over the page.
Sometimes the first place is taken by site with no KW1 and KW2 in the title, bot in url and body text.
[edited by: DaveAtIFG at 4:05 pm (utc) on Jan. 19, 2004]
[edit reason] DeLinked and "exemplified" [/edit]
