Forum Moderators: open
Does anyone know exactly what the editorial process involves?
Do they look for "over opimization"? and can/will you be penalized?
Any tricks/tips to speed up the process?
It just doesn't seem very efficient to me.
Thanks
Do they look for "over opimization"? and can/will you be penalized?
Keyword stuffing, cloaking, redirecting, etc is grounds for an editorial action.
Considering you mentioned "over optimization", it's probably an issue with either keyword stuffing or the use of a doorway page.
And yes... they will penalize you if they find that you're breaking their TOS [help.yahoo.com].
Any tricks/tips to speed up the process?
It just doesn't seem very efficient to me.
The thing that I would like to see is more feedback from the editors. All I see is the "pending" icon next to the URL but there really isn't any particular way to know what is wrong with the pages. On the old inktomi, if you had an error, you could see the line numbers that caused the errors.
Does DMOZ sounds a ring?
Actually, it doesn't.
the keyword density is at about 15% - is that considered keyword stuffing?
The keyword density is irrelevant. If there's excessive use of a keyword for the sole purpose of optimization, that's keyword stuffing.
If you've just got a ton of keywords in one document, that's also keyword stuffing.
On the old inktomi, if you had an error, you could see the line numbers that caused the errors.
It showed HTTP error codes. Why would it show an HTTP error code when it has absolutely nothing to do with the retrieval of data via HTTP?
Might be an idea to have a Section in the Forum just for Site Match as there seem to be various threads addressing it in some way in various sections of the forum...
Yes, there is basically no feedback once your site has gone through editorial..
Yes there is. Wether this "feedback" is accessable by the end user or not is a completely different story.
Exactly!
If the pages are manually being reviewed there must be a record of why sites are being rejected for internal records at PT or OV.
From Overtures point of view though..I guess that by not clarifying why sites are not being included fuels the "grey area" in terms of what is and is not acceptable in terms of SEO strategy .
How is it "feedback" if it doesn't get back to the user?
It's not feedback, hence, the reason I put it in quotation marks. It's an editorial action, period.
In terms of editorial feedback, haven't gotten any recomnmendations/suggestions or anything either.
This particular division of Overture isn't a consulting firm. If reccomendations/suggestions is what you're looking for, there are plenty of search engine marketing firms that will do consulting for you.
No more personal interaction than inktomi, just slower.
Speak for yourself, buddy.
If the pages are manually being reviewed there must be a record of why sites are being rejected for internal records at PT or OV.
That's a given.
From Overtures point of view though..I guess that by not clarifying why sites are not being included fuels the "grey area" in terms of what is and is not acceptable in terms of SEO strategy.
Again, that's a given. If someone needs others to tell them that the keyword stuffing on their page is going to hurt them, or that having doorway pages is going to hurt them terribly in the long run, they probably should be more concerned with learning the fundamentals of search engine optimization.
