Forum Moderators: open
=======================
Have you more aggressively optimized recently?
Internal changes that can lead to potential problems include:
• More aggressive kw optimization, e.g., changes to Titles, META's, <Hx> tags, placement and density of kw's, etc.
• Link structure changes, and especially link text changes. Updates to link text or structure, if done for optimization reasons, can push a site into filter/penalty territory. Look in particular for overuse of kw's.
=======================
Given that the above were more-or-less the rules of SEO, I'm confused now - are we supposed to *stop* doing all the above?!? In which case, how do you indicate what your target keywords/subject is?
I've been out of the loop for a little while, so would appreciate any pointers to threads on this subject (wish there was search function for the forums!), or a re-visit to the topic by our learned members?
If these were the old "rules", what are the new ones:
1. Keywords in Title, Meta tags, H1 - all matching.
2. Keywords mixed into other Hx tags
3. Keywords at beginning, middle, end of page - good density, but natural
4. Keywords in alt text of images
5. Keywords in anchor text of links to your page, matching the keyword phrase used in your Title/Meta/H1 from above.
6. More links to the pages that you want to have more PR - i.e. link back to home page on every page, assuming that home page is important!
Comments appreciated, need to dig myself out of the SERPS hole I just fell into...any guidance on what the new rules of SEO are is much appreciated!
If you spend the effort in fixing off-site stuff, it will be worth it.
Good tip for Title/MetaDesc/H1 - does anyone disagree with this, or is this now accepted practice? Repeating the same phrase in all 3 is indeed what I have done to date!
What do you mean by:
"Avoid keyword stuffing in image link Alt tags beyond one word." Do you mean only one word in the alt tag, or only one instance of keyword in the alt tag?
Also: "If you spend the effort in fixing off-site stuff, it will be worth it." Fixing which off-site stuff? Should I get people to put random text in the incoming links?
On 2 of my sites, with PR = 4, I had changed the link back to the home page to include anchor text that said "Site Name Home" instead of "Home". This may be why these sites were virtually dropped from the index in the past week.
Is it SPAM to link back to your home page with the site name? No... but Google's automated ranking algorithm may think so.
Sorry but that's Nonsense.
>changed the link back to the home page to include
>anchor text that said "Site Name Home" instead of "Home".
>This may be why these sites were virtually dropped from
>the index in the past week.
Sure, you did check the other 99 possible factors, right!?
>Where is the "dropped-site checklist thread"?
[webmasterworld.com...]
Back to undo the tweaks. opinions on whether the the recovery be as swift as the dropping?
Ross
There is no other reason whatsoever for my sites to be dropped... but they were.
DVDBurning - I think you might be right, although this 'oop' seemed to die down a few months ago with old and very optimised sites coming back without changing them. Maybe it applies to a small range of keywords, and you have hit one of them.
If you take google's perspective, a site that has no incoming links can't be too good, no matter how it is SEOed.
I have seen evidence of what was said about how when you get past a certain page rank that SEO work pays off more. It is like you have built some credibility with them and now they will trust what you say is what.
Mhes:
I lean towards OOP because pages are gone. Not burried, gone. Only a couple remain, and cooncidently they don't have the new h2's. This is not a competitve phrase, but it is a location known to Local Search.
use the G site-specific search - i.e
---
google penalty site:webmasterworld.com
---
Typed into G's search will search this site for your keywords.
forgive me if you already knew this - just thought it may help :-)
When we talk of "over optimization" we are talking of:
- misleading cloaking.
- autogenerated content.
- redirect games
- lovely 3rd level domain playing with wildcard dns.
- insane keyword to stop word ratios.
- link pages for the sole purpose of pr.
We are not talking about h1 tags.
Why does google allow this crap? Spammers are laughing at google.
Because they are a biz model based on everyone elses content. That includes sleeping with some powerhouses like Amazon, Netscape, and a dozen other top 50 sites that use various tricks and gimicks - just like you do.
"They don't produce anything. They exist off the production of others." - Carl Fox Wall Street.
- misleading cloaking.
- autogenerated content.
- redirect games
- lovely 3rd level domain playing with wildcard dns.
- link pages for the sole purpose of pr.
I don't do any of this crap. My only concern is the keyword density. I'm not sure what you mean by keyword to stop word ratio, or why ignored stop words would be considered in the keyword density. I've reduced the keyword density... but now have to sit and wait to see what will happen.
Do you have some sense for the desired keyword / key phrase density, or what would be considered rediculous?
Yes, we all know that. But by including these third level domains they are displaying spam redirects, not content.
"- misleading cloaking." - Thats just plain pointless
"- autogenerated content. " - Can be good, can be bad, but other factors will determine if it is over optimised or not.
- redirect games - This is not over optimisation, its just bad optimisation.
- lovely 3rd level domain playing with wildcard dns. - Too complicated for "over optimisation".
- link pages for the sole purpose of pr. " - Thats what link pages are for, lets not pretend otherwise!
IMHO "over-optimisation" are tactics that are good and fair, but done in an unnatural way which demonstrates an awareness of what the algo may be looking for. If Google sees too much emphasis on a keyword phrase, via a combination of h1, anchor, bold, title etc. it will assume the webmaster is trying to get an advantage, not via pure content but via code manipulation, and google appear to (in some sectors) ignore this code.
In short:
Over optimisation = Google has sensed you are algo aware.
I have a hard time believing that algos simply change their value system. I don't think they really penalize.
I could understand identifying cross-linking, but is this a penalty, or are unique environment links rewarded more?
grant go back and read some of the florida threads. That information is burried in a lot of threads. You could also type (site:webmasterworld.com GoogleGuy florida) into Google. Play around with that for a while. You could also add -2004 to narrow it down.
I wish people would quit saying over optimization penalty.
You hit the nail on the head :)
I believe based on some articles that I read that the new Algorithm only takes "on site SEO tactic" as 20% of the formula.
You need good themed links (on topic), relevance, authority are all major factors.
As GG said, what worked in the past doesn’t necessarily work now. In the past you could spam the hell out of a site, and it would get somewhere. I'm afraid that that sort of practice no longer works.
By decreasing KW density and other elements, you are shooting yourself in the foot with the other search engines.
That my opinion :)
My sites were sitting steady for months, rode out the Florida storm nicely, even good for me as many competitors did not. A few weeks ago, I changed my Title/H1 tag/keyword phrase from being a 3-word phrase to a 2-word phrase (which is in fact the main search phrase), and also added some site-wide links containing the 2-word phrase in the anchor text.
Wham! Goodbye to Top10 SERPS - I thought by more closely targetting the 2-word phrase, I would move up to 1-3 zone, from the 4-6 zone - not off the page alltogether!
Given that the site has a ton of solid backlinks and is a PR7, and nothing else changed, I think I can be pretty sure that the drop in the SERPS is related directly to my more aggressive targetting of the 2-word phrase. Note that I am not talking about outrageous overuse of keywords, simply the use of the keywrods in what used to be "accepted practice" (as per my first post in this thread).
My main question, which does not appear to have been fully addressed, is "is this accepted practice no longer valid" - i.e. is it now a no-no to put your keywords in title/H1/top page/throughout content/in links/in anchor text - because Google then thinks you are "algo aware" and penalises you?
The follow-on questions, in which case, is "what the hell do you do to target your keywords"?!?
No.
I have done some testing as far as keywords in H1, H2, title and kw density. Never did 'trip' a filter at Google. (Course the pages looked liked crap).
I have no answer as to why specific sites drop. One of my sites is buried in Google. I update it frequently, etc., but it's still buried. It's less optimized than my best site. Not sure why it happens.
I believe Bretts list woould be more legit reasons for a site to drop.
wellzy
There have been too many webmasters reporting their experience here at WebmasterWorld to dismiss the fact that Google has implemented a filter that penalizes sites for optimizing too heavily on particular keywords or key phrases. It seems clear to me that internal backlinks that use the key phrase can help to trip the filter... that is to say that if you have every page on your site link back to the home page with a keyword combination instead of "Home" - EVEN IF THIS KEYWORD COMBINATION IS THE NAME OF YOUR SITE - you may get booted from the index. Of course, the keyword / key phrase density on the page is also a critical factor.
The only person who could say with certainty that this doesn't exist is someone who knows the recipe for the secret sauce... and I doubt we will hear from him. I appreciate the feedback from AnonyMouse and others who have confirmed what the problem may be for me.
