one-size-fits-all SEO

[rcjordan]

I've finished grossly modifying the Gossamer Threads [gossamer-threads.com] Links2 script to write a directory system , i.e. visible hallway, for one of my sites which has nearly 2000 content pages. Ultimately, I plan to include about 1000 of the primary pages in this directory. This software writes 100% static pages based on a master templates (which, in turn, have embedded if/then logic --very sexy). One of my modifications allows the "build" script to select from a roster of different templates on-the-fly and then construct the static pages accordingly. The template also injects, again on-the-fly, meta keywords and meta descriptions in each page built on that particular template.

This directory is currently set up and running with approximately 150 templates, and builds about 300 static pages with the information I've been able to load so far, each properly cataloged under their respective categories. (The "build" takes 330 seconds, btw)

SOooo... given the fact that this site will -because of its size- be submitted as written to many SE's and not optimized for any specific SE, I have some questions on what works best for one-size-fits-all SEO:

#1)Title - what is the optimum number of characters?

#2)Meta keywords
_A) Do I use them, or rely on the text content in the body of the page?
_B) If it is determined that it is best to use meta keys, what is the optimum number of characters?

#3)Meta descriptions
_A & B) same questions that I asked re meta keys; do I use them and, if so, the optimum number of characters?

#4)Footers
I haven't concentrated much on this yet, but the templates also have logic to stamp in header and footer files if I'd like to use them --though the site's design will limit me to the use of footers. From an optimization viewpoint, are footers worth the effort?

[Brett_Tabke]

#1- Five words under 45 chars. Keyword in first position. Don't dilute the title with other power keywords. Go for fluff on the other four.
#2- merely repeat your title in your meta kw.
#3- description - tricky to do on-the-fly. You must, you must work that kw from your title into the desc somehow. At the same time it must 'read' well and spam free. Length, up to 127 chars. Short or long doesn't really matter. Just focus on your kw and don't obfuscate the page by trying to work in more than 1 kw in the desc.
#4- Headers, repeat your title kw in an h1 header, in bold of page text, and in a link somewhere pointing at the page you are building.
#5- nuke any on page jscript.
#6- don't nest the tables more than 2 deep at any time.
#7- I assume you have a menu that leads back to root? If so, footers/headers become redundant. That may be the place (footer) where you work into links back and forth between the pages to give this some se footprint for insite links and spider bread crumbs.

[rcjordan]

>#3- description - tricky to do on-the-fly.
Yes, tricky. Since this is a directory, the content is likely to be packed with links and description chock-full of keywords in real, non-spammy blurbs and paragraphs. Being a 'gut call' kind of guy, and not up on the latest target percentage for keyword density, my instincts tell me the page itself -with individualized content- might be better than groups of 5 or 10 pages with the same description stamped in by the template. I'm leaning towards zero meta description.

>#7- I assume you have a menu that leads back to root? If so, footers/headers become redundant.
yes, even better than that, the build script constructs a static link for each directory level above the one containing the page being viewed or spidered, so at the top of each page there are beaucoups cross-links. My thought is to submit the 3rd-level pages (the vast majority of the site is 5 levels deep). The spiders would immediately pick up a link to both of the higher levels.

>h1 header
h1 or h2? there was a thread recently on h2's rising to the top in the algos (h1's perhaps hinting spam technique)

[NFFC]

On two word phrases I get a modicum of success with repeating
the more common word at the end of the title.

<title>search phrase the ESSENTIAL guide to phrase<title>

And also use a POWER word in caps to draw the click.

[mark roach]

Brett answered:

#1- Five words under 45 chars. Keyword in first position. Don't dilute the title with other power keywords. Go for fluff on the other four.

This may be a dumb question, but what do you mean by power keywords and fluff ?

[NFFC]

>This may be a dumb question

Nope, my fault for confusing the issue.

What I mean by a POWER word is a word that is *not* part of your keyword strategy, whose purpose is to both pad out the length of the title *and* to encourage the searchers to actually click on the listing. Words such as NEW, GUARANTEED, NOW etc.

[pete]

RC,

1) For on the fly, I would stick to H1 definitely. I know that it was mentioned that H2 is working for Google but I still need to be convinced.

2) No descriptions. I have not used descriptions on a number of pages. Made sure that the first copy that is picked up reads well & contains my keyword (preferably first). Worked really well on AV - pages done well on excite and fast as well.

[Brett_Tabke]

Power keyword vs fluff keyword. "audio speakers for sale". Speakers would be a power keyword. Try not to work in Audio or sound unless you are going for the phrase. Audio will dilute "speakers" and the se will always look for "audio speakers" to match the page in a search. You wont get many hits from pure "speakers" for that page - only "audio speakers".

Fluff keywords are your usual fare of adverbs and adjectives that border on stop or filter words. You want the se to find only your chosen keyword appetizing.

[sundown]

RC,

I'm also running a directory site, although I'm using Hyperseek, I'd love to pick your brain a bit....(it only hurts for a minute).

Like yours, my script uses templates to build static pages, I can specify different templates for different categories. I'm struggling now with what kind of strategy to use. It also creates a master link page, but that crams hundreds of links onto one page. I've been hand editing it down to 20 or 30 per page.

http://www.professionalphotography.com/quickfocus

Any thoughts?

Thanks!

[rcjordan]

> I'd love to pick your brain a bit....(it only hurts for a minute).
That's assuming I have enough left to go the full minute.

I'm on the road for the next few days, and am online via a laptop that is little more than an email appliance, so I only reviewed a few pages of your site, but what I saw was pretty much a 'traditional' category/sub-category/link structure. Here are my thoughts (feel free to 'pick' if I miss a point)...

I'd move the search field to the bottom of the page and -if possible- change the link url to go straight to the site rather than through the cgi/hyperseek counter. To get around the repetitive title problem, I ran the path as the title. Since my categories are also keywords, the title changes dynamically from page to page, unless there are multiple pages of links under the same category. Finally, I would assign 3rd-level domains to each of your main categories and submit them. You might even consider registering other domain names for sub-categories, writing a page or two of "overview" content then linking straight into the relevant section of your directory for "more info" on the topic.

[2_much]

Hi! This is great information. If possible, could somebody clarify a few of questions that I have?

Title: 5 words, 45 characters, one target keyword surrounded by fluff words...is it spam to repeat the keyword in the title?
*h1 or h2? more thoughts?
*is it more effective to choose ONE keyword and spread that ONE keyword throughout the text (not description)...If so, would including other keywords in the text detract from that keyword's impact?
*do engines favor hyphens in the domain name?
*keyword meta tag--best to maintain it short and focused, or to choose various related keywords trying to target the different phrases people would use in their queries?

These are all pretty basic questions, but I've read so many different suggestions that I don't know what's up any more. So any opinions or suggestions would be appreciated...

Thanks!!

[rcjordan]

2M,

My gut calls on a few

>*h1 or h2? more thoughts?
I know H1's do well, but I'm still leaning to H2's

>do engines favor hyphens in the domain name?
I haven't found any significant difference.... not worth losing sleep over.

>*keyword meta tag--best to maintain it short and focused, or to choose various related
Uhhh, I've dumped ALL metas. Spending time getting the title, path, content, and image "alt" tags to be in sync w/ keywords. I think the SE's are moving towards considering metas as prime spam territory. Look at the way Google picks through the page to build those weird descriptions, there's also been some recent posts that INK might be doing the same. I personally think the SE's would be smart to ignore metas entirely, it forces a site's hand if they have to compete for traffic using text from the body of the page.

[lizzie]

Dumped all METAs! You mean I have to figure out some content
for my doorways? Any time I've put more than a short paragraph
of content on a page it goes to the back of the pile.
My best page --usually in the top 4 of A.V. or MSN--has a huge long title full of keyword phrases and a short meaningless
paragraph. They just use the first 2 or 3 keyword phrases in the title. (Of course, they HAVE stopped taking my submissions this past month.)

[rcjordan]

Yep, dumped 'em --or doing so (except on top 20 pages, see 'Thou Shalt Not' thread). Several of us started doing that waaaay back in May.

Dumping doorways/hallways too, or converting them to content-filled directories (see the 1st post in this thread).

[lizzie]

BTW, I used Webposition gold to make a doorway page last week and
it is number 2 in AV tonight. Wish they were all like AV!

[2_much]

RC,
Thanks so much for answering my questions.
Going back to your post in "submissions to google"...
From my very limited experience, I have certainly discovered that there are no "absolute truths" in SEO. However, the information that you and others so kindly post in this forum allows rookies such as myself to evaluate, experiment, and eventually come up with our own conclusions. When we have a strong enough foundations, we will one day be able to do what you guys are doing for us. So thank you for taking the time to help others out, it is very much appreciated.

* As to the meta tags...I don't mean to challenge you on this...but I'm confused as to why you are leaving meta tags out of your pages. As of now, there are several engines that are still using them, such as Altavista, Go, Hotbot, and Inktomi...So wouldn't leaving out meta tags altogether affect your rankings with these engines? Whereas if you inlude them but also focus on other important issues such as title and page text, you would be covering every possible angle?
I also think that soon the engines will stop using the meta tags...they are getting better and better about developing anti-spam techniques...

* You said you are focusing on "image "alt" tags to be in sync w/ keyword"...so basically you choose several keywords for your pages and include those keywords in your alt tags? what's the max. amount of keywords that you include in your alt tags? throughout your text, do you use many of them or do you repeat the main KW several times?

* another question...does anyone know of the optimum keyword density to strive for? the percentage? or where I can find this?

* finally...RC, you said..."Dumping doorways/hallways too, or converting them to content-filled directories (see the 1st post in this thread)". Unfortunately, I still don't know much about the technical aspect of SEO...so your first post sounds like Greek to me...can you clarify this a bit?

Again, thanks for your help!!!
2M

[rcjordan]

read whois rcjordan [webmasterworld.com] if you haven't done so already, then challenge away...

>So wouldn't leaving out meta tags altogether affect your rankings with these engines?
Back in May, Pete and I both noticed that metas really weren't important --many of our top ranked pages didn't have them (I had been lazy, don't know Pete's story). For me, these were content pages, not doorways, and the content text, path, title were doing the job. What we had found to be MOST IMPORTANT (not mentioned in this thread) was that it met Brett's then-kinda-new 'themes' criteria. Pete and I basically agreed that if you hit on themes, then metas became alot of work for very little advantage.

>"image "alt" tags to be in sync w/ keyword"
Basically, I try to name them realistically, use a keyword or two. They are usually short, NOT spammy. Remember, editors open your source every now and then.

>optimum keyword density to strive for? the percentage
I don't do that either. But I think the answer is 8 - 10 percent (I've seen 8 favored).

>Dumping doorways/hallways
I think that hallways are pretty unsophisticated. Doorways can go either way. These are topics in themselves, so search around a bit, then post. For now, don't worry about them too much.

[rcjordan]

This One-Size-Fits-All thread seems to have struck a chord. Here's cross-link to a thread that I think relates: Thou Shalt Not [webmasterworld.com]

[rcjordan]

Oil, saw your double-digit post in Thou Shalt Not --kw density less than 8% ?

[Brett_Tabke]

It really depends upon the analyzer used to do the calculations RC. There are so many different ways you can calc density. (stop words in/out, titles in/out, metas, urls, headers...etc)