Current time: 04-24-2014, 03:09 PM Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

SEO basics?
12-12-2006, 02:16 AM
Post: #71
SEO basics?
Quote:I think this support my point about how content is important.
I agree with you on that, and it *is* a very good example of how quality content really drives search engine "hits".

--rlparker
Find all posts by this user
12-12-2006, 02:23 AM
Post: #72
SEO basics?
Oh, BTW, I think Seiler said that my #2 ranking for a two-word search query with 11 million results wasn't impressive because I wasn't in the #1 position (or words to that effect). Well, after the latest Yahoo update, looks like I'm #1 for that search ("save electricity").

With zero Meta Tags.

How many million Meta Tag'd sites am I beating? I don't know the exact number, but the general answer is, "All of them." Smile

I grow weary of fighting. Many of us just have different opinions. I admit I get defensive when I feel attacked, as I'm sure others do, so I pledge to try to play nice and I hope others will do the same. Thanks.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
12-12-2006, 06:13 AM
Post: #73
SEO basics?
Quote:all the Talk page links have REF=NOFOLLOW. So I don't get any credit for those.
First of all, the attribute is rel="nofollow". Secondly, I completely agree with you on the value of content - there is no substitute for quality content, and content trumps keywords any day of the week.

Finally, I will say that you would be able to improve your site ranking by embracing web standards and moving your precious content nearer to the top of your document. View the source code of my home page to see what I mean - only major navigation links come before my content, and even those could be moved if necessary. As a proof of concept, you will note that my relatively dull personal site has a Google PageRank equal to your own (6/10).

--------
Simon Jessey | Keystone Websites
Save $97 on yearly plans with promo code SCJESSEY97
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
12-12-2006, 06:19 AM
Post: #74
SEO basics?
Quote:I agreed with everything except:

Quote:6..As always: Spamming=BAD.

But I was afraid to disagree. :-) Spammers provide referrals to satisfy many software and medicinal needs.
You forgot mortgage re-financing and HOT STOCK TIPS!
Find all posts by this user
12-12-2006, 06:24 AM
Post: #75
SEO basics?
Quote: you would be able to improve your site ranking by embracing web standards and moving your precious content nearer to the top of your document
Um, #1 out of 11 million results on a traffic-driving two-word term is good enough for me. Smile

And at the risk of starting another war, the PageRank number has nothing to do with whether your site follows standards or not, it's based on the PageRank of the pages that link to yours.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
12-12-2006, 07:09 AM
Post: #76
SEO basics?
Quote:And at the risk of starting another war, the PageRank number has nothing to do with whether your site follows standards or not, it's based on the PageRank of the pages that link to yours.
Well, then, there ya have it folks - straight from the God Haxxor Of Teh Intarweb's keyboard: Don't follow standards, because rebelling against basic Internet web standards is coolness and following them means you're just some dullard that doesn't know what they're talking about and your page will suck!

ObSheesh: Spot it.
Find all posts by this user
12-12-2006, 07:58 AM
Post: #77
SEO basics?
Quote:the PageRank number has nothing to do with whether your site follows standards or not, it's based on the PageRank of the pages that link to yours.
You are both right and wrong. From Google's own PageRank blurb:

"Google combines PageRank with sophisticated text-matching techniques to find pages that are both important and relevant to your search. Google goes far beyond the number of times a term appears on a page and examines all aspects of the page's content (and the content of the pages linking to it) to determine if it's a good match for your query."

That means, boys and girls, how your document is constructed can be just as important as what your document is about. Furthermore, other (less sophisticated?) search engines will not scan an entire document, but rather concentrate on headings (<h1>, <h2>, etc.) and early paragraphs (<p>). If the search bot has to wade through lists of links before it gets to the meat and potatoes, the good stuff might not be found. The easier the site is to find on any search engine, the more PageRank mojo you are likely to get because you will get more "quality" links. Things like nested layout tables will make the relevant content harder for search engines to find.

Finally, let me present you with the icing on the cake. Embracing web standards will result in faster page loading times due to less bandwidth overhead from the smaller, easier-to-render documents.

For more on web standards, let me modestly point you to this extremely popular document.

--------
Simon Jessey | Keystone Websites
Save $97 on yearly plans with promo code SCJESSEY97
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
12-12-2006, 07:00 PM
Post: #78
SEO basics?
Quote:Well, then, there ya have it folks - straight from the God Haxxor Of Teh Intarweb's keyboard: Don't follow standards, because rebelling against basic Internet web standards is coolness and following them means you're just some dullard that doesn't know what they're talking about and your page will suck!
I did say that I would play nice and asked others to do the same. May I ask you to not put words in my mouth? I never said I was "rebelling" against standards nor have I ever encouraged anyone else to do the same. I think standards are great and eventually I'll get around to updating all my pages. But in the meantime, my point was simply that a page that doesn't follow standards exactly can still rank well. I think I've proved that beyond any doubt -- which is perhaps why people are looking for other ways to attack me.

This was in response to the suggestion that I could improve my rank by following standards, to which the obvious reply is that my sites have great rank even though they're not coded according to strict standards. That is by no means an *endorsement* of not following standards, just stating the obvious. And again, I don't know how I'm supposed to "improve" my rank beyond the #1 position.

Do any of the people criticizing my ranking methods actually rank better than me? If not, then why are they criticizing me?

Quote:"Google combines PageRank with sophisticated text-matching techniques...." That means, boys and girls, how your document is constructed can be just as important as what your document is about."
This addresses something different than what I actually said. Note that Google says it COMBINES PageRank with OTHER STUFF. It's saying that importance is determined by the PR# + Other Stuff (such as, perhaps, web standards). I wasn't talking about the other stuff, I was talking about the PR# *only*. What I said was:

Quote:And at the risk of starting another war, the PageRank number has nothing to do with whether your site follows standards or not, it's based on the PageRank of the pages that link to yours.
This is undeniably true. No expert disputes that the PageRank score itself for a page is derived only from the PageRank score of the other pages that link to it, and nothing else. The PR score isn't the be-all and end-all of how high pages rank in the SERPs to be sure, but there is also no question that it's calculated solely on the basis of he PR scores of the other pages linking in.

It looks like I was prescient by prefacing my comments with, "At the risk of starting another war..."
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
12-18-2006, 12:14 PM
Post: #79
SEO basics?
Quote:I did say that I would play nice and asked others to do the same.
Oh, *puh-leeze*, spare me the doe-eyed wounded Bambi routine, willya?
In the midst of people making completely valid suggestions you came blustering in to "poo-pooh" the lot, stating basically that META tagging and proper formatting isn't worth it - because *your* website is the shiznitz #1 site.

If that's your idea of "play nice", then you need to get a grip.

Quote:May I ask you to not put words in my mouth?
Again, spare me; you've already stepped on your own crank a number of times in this thread amidst offers of throwing down with teh moneys on your #1 webinator site. Try Googling for "bw sports travel tackle bag"; one of my client sites ranks #2. I didn't see yours in the list.

So if perhaps I exaggerated, call it an interpretive view of your self-righteous prattle.

Quote:It looks like I was prescient by prefacing my comments with, "At the risk of starting another war..."
To people that've gotten over themselves to some greater or lesser degree, "prescience" isn't quite the same as that which you bring upon yourself.
Find all posts by this user
12-18-2006, 06:25 PM
Post: #80
SEO basics?
Quote:In the midst of people making completely valid suggestions you came blustering in to "poo-pooh" the lot, stating basically that META tagging and proper formatting isn't worth it - because *your* website is the shiznitz #1 site.... If that's your idea of "play nice", then you need to get a grip.
And you think *those comments* you just made *do* qualify as playing nice? Read my last several posts and try to find any of the kind of venom you've been directing at me. What's odd is not how much you're insulting me, but that you're insulting me in the same breath as you're complaining that *I'm* not the one who's playing nice. I tried several posts ago to propose a truce, yet the abuse of me keeps coming. I haven't returned it, much as you might wish to pretend I have.

I mentioned my site ranking because I was simply providing evidence to prove my point that a site can rank well with no META tags and without following standards. Surely if I *didn't* provide evidence then you would have given me an even stronger lashing. What' I'm not supposed to provide evidence to support my claims? Please, be reasonable.

Quote:"May I ask you to not put words in my mouth?" Again, spare me.
No, sorry. When someone puts words in my mouth I will call them on it. You suggested that I was "rebelling" against web standards because I thought doing so was "cool". I said no such thing, believe no such thing, and advocate no such thing. I explained this above already. Your saying "Spare me" doesn't change that fact.

Quote:Try Googling for "bw sports travel tackle bag"; one of my client sites ranks #2. I didn't see yours in the list.
Are you being sarcastic or serious? Are you truly bragging about being #2 for a *five-word* search phrase? There are only 49,000 results for that phrase. The example I gave of my own site was #1 for a two-word phrase with 11 million results.

As for my site not being in the SERPS for your five word phrase, are you being serious about that, too? Obviously I've never *targeted* that phrase (or even covered that topic) so how would I rank for it?

If you wish to continue this, could you identify exactly what it is you disagree with me about, and do so without name-calling? Thank you.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user


Forum Jump: