Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 188.8.131.52
Forum Moderators: open
To totally prove the PR myth here. We have a site rated 4 that is on Google but we have not found it under any search term. I don't understand why they would penalize it if it even is. I think Google has been feeding us lines about how to get good listings because I don't think THEY even know how their spider indexes sites.
tons of SPAM in the SERPs these days...
SEO is really easy for those who take this route..
hard for those who find themselves competing against these aggressive tactics..
I've been reading here for over a year now and the arrows of all advice and serp-deciding algorithm changes all point in the same direction - honest, complete content. By complete I mean not filled with validation errors.
Of course there are zingers out there like the use of h1 h2 tags and anchor text - but I find all is fine as long as one uses them for what they were invented for and nothing else. And it is obvious that one would expect that the clickable word that he clicks upon should be almost a title for the page it opens. All the rules in Google's algo go in this sense - user logic.
So make your page titles, seperate your text with subject titles when the subject changes, make your links link to pages that hold what they describe, and go over the whole before you publish it to make sure everyone, everywhere can read it.
I can't see it as being any more complicated than that.
My aplogies to others that may think of me as a whiner---ain't going there anymore.
One example is if your using tables there are a few little things that affect the way your page is read.
This is from Googles guidlines pages.
Hope that helps a bit
I have know lost 95 of my visitors and all my revenue, i have taken this opputunity to redesign my sites. The main changes i have made is to target links which are related to my sites.For youe information they are all city guides and i have targeted links from sites which have some link ie sports clubs, businesses, local organsiations. They are not directley related to my site however they are all links that would be of some use to my visitors. I am hoping this will see Google rank me well. I must point out that i have not gone for site with good PR, i have gone after links specifically that will be of use.
Also i have removed all my interlinks, however i am i right in thinking that i can interlink a number of sites, which will be value by Google. Does any body have any idea if there is a number you can interlink.
My point is if my theroy is right ( i have been wrong with most of my theroys), that you no longer need to look for big PR sites, or pay for links, simply all you have to do is swap links that would be relevant to your user. I think this makes sense if you are a search enginee looking to provided your users with the best results.
Ill sit back and wait for you guys to rip my theroy to bits.
Something tells me that, in the google algorithm (and post-crawl processing) that google takes the extra .0025 (est.) seconds to compare the text content of the link-ee/er linked pages to see if some of the words match up.
I've worked hard to get my clients good results. If it were that Google only had a small amount users it wouldn't be so bad. It's because Google has become the largest used engine.
IMHO, this is what happens when the SE's start trying to play 'catch the optimiser' - by overchanging their algo to try to trap some of the slyer techniques out there. And if you have a dynamic site there's an even greater risk of being 'knocked' by over-reacting SE's who can't find the middle of the 'what is ligit' road and end up not only giving irrelevent results, but whacking off those just watching from the sidelines.
The beauty of Google is that it is moving, despite its many 'adjustment' vaccilations over the past year, in a discernable direction: Relevent results. Ignoring the techniques spammers use to bring first-time (and usually once-only) visitors to their sites, Google favours what brings visitors back: solid, coherent and cohesive content.
This is probably to be expected in a search engine that is now financially driven.
I'm not sure we'll see another Florida though - I think it will be more gradual.
But by the by, Google will gradually turn into a paid-for search engine (it's already 40% there!)
And lose all credibility - that's why we're not investing :-)
Funny I seem to have the OPPOSITE problem. I can get my pages on the top 5 of Google under just about any term I want, but can't seem to get in the top 10 pages of Y!.
I've been working on the assumption getting a page on both at the same time was mutually exclusive and just worrying about G, since they've always brought at least 3 times the traffic anyway.
Doesn't page rank count for anything anymore?
joined:Aug 20, 2004
joined:Aug 20, 2004
joined:Aug 20, 2004
Give people a reason to link to your site. It is the most underrated topic in webmasterworld.
Although I'm a bit late to the thread, this is the most useful nugget I've seen. The best way to rank well in Google (long term) is to build a quality website. Offer better content / more content / different content / laser targeted content than your competitors and the traffic will come.
I hope that Google is planning a scheme where the actual users are deciding what's relevant, by tracking them with cookies and the toolbar.
Of course this brings some privacy concerns.
Well, G has finally picked up about ten pages from my 1300+ page site. And most of the descriptions of those pages are from the meta description tags, not from the page text itself. If G were picking up on the page text, I might be doing better.