Conflicting recommendations…help!

[MeanSEO]

I have been dabbling in SEO for the past 2 years and had very respectable results.

When I first started, I purchased Web Position Gold and had what I felt were extremely good results. At first I used it to generate pages and rate pages already made. As time went on I depended less and less on the software and more on a gut feel and my ranking kept increasing.

I just attended what I felt was a very good SEO workshop for a week and was advised that Alt Tags no longer mater for SEO and as a mater of fact I felt as though it was hinted that it might be looked at as spam. The people who gave the workshop are known in the SEO industry and the workshop was a very good beginning for people who are just starting SEO. The teachers were experts on writing of content, utilizing certain software, and collecting SEO information for a variety of different sources. They were not coders or people who can break algorithms.

When I just wrote a page, I left out the alt tags and ran it through an updated Web Position Page Critique (The part of the program that analyzes your pages and tells you what you need to do) and it suggested I add the tags. If it could it would have screamed it at me.

Does anyone have any hard evidence to leave the tags out? I don’t want to be spamming but I don’t want to lose what I feel is a fair edge either.

Of course I am not condoning cramming keywords into alt tags but to “naturally describe” the image and use keywords if appropriate.

[greeneagle]

Quote:

"Does anyone have any hard evidence to leave the tags out?"

No, and I don't believe anyone else here will either!

Ken

[wrmineo]

Images should have alt-tags without fail. Here's the quick skinny as to why:

1. Bots cannot read images, but they can decipher the embedded alt-text associated with them.

2. Many web users may be visually impaired and unable to see the images, but the "tools" they use for surfing will read to them the text in the alt tag.

Yes, it is true that over use of the wrong or non-relevant text in the alt-tag can be regarded as spam, but appropriate usage can boost rankings as well as assist bots and visually impaired people in appreciating your site.

By the way - have you read what the search engines want directly from their sites and guidelines? Relying solely on other people's best guesses will lead to more speculation and trouble, whereas getting it "straight from the horse's mouth" will be invaluable. To that end, you should really check out these free resources AND see what Google has to say about WebPositionGold ... you'll be surprised; if not alarmed!

[MeanSEO]

Originally Posted by wrmineo

you should really check out these free resources AND see what Google has to say about WebPositionGold ... you'll be surprised; if not alarmed!

I know all about what they have in their TOS.

I do not use the reporting function of WebPositionGold which is what Google is up in arms about. I also NEVER submit a site through any tool or "add url" link.

With only 2 answers so far my mind seems to be already made up. Use the tags but don't overdo it.

[wrmineo]

No, I wasn't referring to the TOS of the search engines so much as the Webmaster Guidelines - you can find some links to the individual engines' guidelines - What Search Engines Want also in this forum.

[Evic]

You should always use the alt tag for an image, it's W3C standard. Using the alt tags increase your site's accessibility for the handicapped.

I doubt any spiders look into these alt tags for keywords, but it would be interesting to learn if the top players generate accessibility rankings of a page to increase it's standings a bit.

[wrmineo]

Sorry, I fixed the link in my post above.

To Evic's comment:

Taken from Google Webmaster Guidelines

Originally Posted by Google

Make sure that your TITLE and ALT tags are descriptive and accurate

Yes, spiders read alt-text/tags; again, it's important to use appropriately though, because many site owners have tried to over-optimize and been slammed for spam.

All good things in moderation :)

[greeneagle]

Let's make sure there is no misunderstanding here:

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN "OVER OPTIMIZATION PENALTY"!

IMO - That Monster is a frigment of a an over active imagination or someone looking for another excuse for failure!

Ken

[wrmineo]

Ken - why the harsh tone :)

I was merely stating that some site owners try to over do their efforts and in fact get caught up in over doing; it in their attempts to optimize some go overboard and end up spamming instead of optimizing.

So ... to that end, I would say that one can over-optimize no different than one could under optimize; meaning:

under-optimize: fail to present in the best possible light.

over-optimize: go beyond acceptable SEO and fall into spam

[greeneagle]

Rob,

This was not directed toward anyone, especially not you. I have high regard for your contributions at WPW!

It just seemed the right time to crank this issue up.

It seemed appropiate here. If you don't agree lets play with it in a new thread:

http://www.webproworld.com/viewtopic.php?t=51624

Ken

[wrmineo]

No Ken, I didn't think it was directed at me, and I appreciate your comments about my contributions - merely it was a note that others may not understand your zeal and be put off by it. I've seen your newly created thread and already offered a response.

[cyanide]

Originally Posted by suesheboy

Use the tags but don't overdo it.

You just answered your own question.




Web Hosting | Webmaster Help

[wrmineo]

»side note to cyanide «

I saw your new pic over at TWT - awesome!

[cyanide]

Originally Posted by wrmineo

»side note to cyanide «

I saw your new pic over at TWT - awesome!

LOL
thanks, wrmineo... gotta love kramer


Web Hosting | Webmaster Help

[Evic]

Once again I agree with green (when have I not) that penalization is a non-issue.

One thing I do believe takes places is what I like to call the "silent treatment." In my experience if you "over-optimize," if you will a particular part of your SEO campaign (img-alt tags for instance), engines will simply ignore that element.

Not a penalization, but it's definitely not doing you any good either.

[MeanSEO]

Greeneagle as usual hit the nail on the head and confirmed my fears of paying for and getting bad information.

While free advice is usually worth what you pay for it, I have found the information here and at the webmasterworld conferences invaluable.

Thanks

[mktplace]

Forget what they told you in class - go look at their websites and see what they are actually doing!

As fas as this OOP, I can tell you from experience that if I put more than a few words on an ALT or TITLE tag for an image, Google lowers my rankings, but MSN raises them! Go figure.

It seems like from Googles point of view, the ALT text should say what the picture is, whereas in MSN they prefer a keyword rich pseudo-description (i.e. keyword stuffed); alas, MSN will eventually catch up with their algorithms. . .