Best On Page SEO Factors

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

I did several times. For example, Michael at Nipplecharms had that problem too.

If a page is not ranking for a keyword it does not mean that page is being penalized.

[saikatblogger]

Visual appeal can influence the "Time Spent" factor and search engines may consider this as a part of relevancy point. That way Visual appeal is related to SEO I guess.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by saikatblogger

Visual appeal can influence the "Time Spent" factor and search engines may consider this as a part of relevancy point. That way Visual appeal is related to SEO I guess.

I've been away from the forums for a while so I need to ask this question.

Has anyone proven that the length of time a visitor stays on your site affects your ranking?

[janeth]

Since I am wrong and everyone else is correct here is my question.

If you build me a website with all the features listed above will I rank for all my keywords?

Or any of my keywords?

[weslinda]

Janeth, have you read my replies? Is everything black or white with you? I never shared this is the only thing you have to do to rank in search engines. The post is entitled on page factors, that's it, these are optimal on page factors for a quality web site that will in turn improve the rankings of a page.

Are there other things that should be done in the scheme of an overall SEO initiative? Of course. Are there other avenues to drive traffic? Of course. Should a web site overlook these factors? No.

The key point of these items was to give a beginner or even experienced web designer a solid foundation to building a well balanced web site that with work will perform well in search engines.

To answer your question, I do feel that over time, a site built this way will not only rank, but outperform others if everything else is equal. I'm not sure how my point is getting construed to mean something else. Never written here were the words "Only SEO Things You Need To Do For Success", why is that the view you've taken?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by weslinda

Janeth, have you read my replies? Is everything black or white with you? I never shared this is the only thing you have to do to rank in search engines. The post is entitled on page factors, that's it, these are optimal on page factors for a quality web site that will in turn improve the rankings of a page.

Are there other things that should be done in the scheme of an overall SEO initiative? Of course. Are there other avenues to drive traffic? Of course. Should a web site overlook these factors? No.

The key point of these items was to give a beginner or even experienced web designer a solid foundation to building a well balanced web site that with work will perform well in search engines.

To answer your question, I do feel that over time, a site built this way will not only rank, but outperform others if everything else is equal. I'm not sure how my point is getting construed to mean something else. Never written here were the words "Only SEO Things You Need To Do For Success", why is that the view you've taken?

Others took what you said and made it into the only thing that needed to be done.

Some of these things will help in the ranking of your website but without outside influence none of these things will make any difference at all.

And you do not have to have any of these things to rank. But having them can make it easer.

[Chris]

Originally Posted by janeth

I've been away from the forums for a while so I need to ask this question.

Has anyone proven that the length of time a visitor stays on your site affects your ranking?

it absolutely does nothing. it may influence an alexa ranking but big whoop.

how in the heck can a search engine rank a site by the way it looks?

bots are text-reading devices, not human searchers...

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Chris

it absolutely does nothing. it may influence an alexa ranking but big whoop.

how in the heck can a search engine rank a site by the way it looks?

bots are text-reading devices, not human searchers...

Thanks Chris,

I was thinking maybe a lot had changed since my last visit. (-:

[janeth]

Just to back up what I was saying.

Take the keyword computers

Apple ranks for the keyword computers.

It is a very competitive keyword. But apple does not use the keyword in their text.

Their title tag says

<title>Apple</title>

There keyword tags says

<meta name="Keywords" content="Apple">

and W3 says

This page is not Valid HTML 4.01 Transitional!

While all the stuff in the site is good to have it is not a must when it comes to ranking a site.

Just my two cents. (-:

[Chris]

Originally Posted by janeth

Just to back up what I was saying.

Take the keyword computers

Apple ranks for the keyword computers.

It is a very competitive keyword. But apple does not use the keyword in their text.

Their title tag says

<title>Apple</title>

There keyword tags says

<meta name="Keywords" content="Apple">

and W3 says

This page is not Valid HTML 4.01 Transitional!

While all the stuff in the site is good to have it is not a must when it comes to ranking a site.

Just my two cents. (-:

but wait, that would mean their on-page factors didn't have much impact...

[rumblepup]

It's been awhile since I've been here, but I've gotta chime in here.

I would love to see this debate go on for pages and pages and pages of diplomatic arguments. Those are the best kind of threads. Adds a bunch of very kewl content hear at WPW, and teaches as it goes.

However, what drives me nuts are the inroads to a personal attack.

Weslinda, Awesome article and great post. Great way to keep open to debate. This article had nothing to do with SEO, only a good starting point for a professionally developed web page. Some would agree, some would disagree, but there it is.

Webnauts, you don't have to prove anything. Everyone, just take it on good advice that he knows of what he speaks.

nipplecharms1, thank you for giving an honest report on what you've experienced. Don't answer janeths question if you don't want to.

janeth, I'm sorry but I think you've stepped over the line with your question to Michael. If you want to seriously debate the topic, be my guest, but this isn't a p---ing match, this is a community. If your trying to help, GREAT! FANTASTIC!

I know you have some great experience and help to give. Do That!

But I don't think it's a good idea to turn the debate into a personal thing. Weslinda provided a great article, debate the merits of the article, or debate it's points, and the post, not what you think about each other.

Or no cookies for any of you.

[nipplecharms1]

Hi Janeth. I do not mind answering this question. No. Anything else? LOL. Read below why I say No. There is a qualification.

But seriously, the motivation for this site has changed since we first started it. I will not go into that here.

I am not sure Janeth what the point is you are trying to make with your question though. I only have maybe 30-50 items on the site and they are not really big-ticket items. It is also a very niche category that is over populated. And then there is E-tay that siphons off a lot of traffic.

If your question is, "did the work that was performed on the site by Webnauts et. al. cause the site to be a total income producer?", I would have to say, yes I think so. If I opened a site with Adult Toys, and my wife and I are "toying" with that idea (ok, pun intended), I think Webnauts would get the job. What he and his team did, so far as the KW position can speak, looks to have gotten us back to the first page on many terms, and #1 on others. The traffic is picking up. Build it and they will not necessarily come. You still have to get the site "in the customers face". Are we number 1 yet on our number 1 and number 2 terms? No. Will we be? I have little doubt.

Here is my qualification to my answer. Do I want this current site to become my total income source? Yes and no. Total means all. I am too much of a workaholic to allow anything to be my sole source.


If someone wanted to buy the site and make it the sole source, yes I think with a few more items it could be. (If I knew how to bold this statement I would!!!!!)


Was that too long an answer to a very direct question? So I guess the answer, in a vacuum, is Yes. I am not "making a living" at it because I am an American and I want MORE!

Janeth, my best as always.

Michael

PS thanks PUP!

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Chris

but wait, that would mean their on-page factors didn't have much impact...

Yes that would be correct and the point I was trying to make.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by rumblepup

nipplecharms1, thank you for giving an honest report on what you've experienced. Don't answer janeths question if you don't want to.

janeth, I'm sorry but I think you've stepped over the line with your question to Michael. If you want to seriously debate the topic, be my guest, but this isn't a p---ing match, this is a community. If your trying to help, GREAT! FANTASTIC!

A site was give as an example to prove a point. Once the site and the owner of the site stepped in to say, this is all you need, I feel at that point I had the right to ask questions about the site.

I am sorry that this upset you so much but if no one is allowed to ask questions about the site then you should not use it as an example.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by nipplecharms1

I am not sure Janeth what the point is you are trying to make with your question

I am very surprised with your answer. I have found that in most cases it takes a lot more than a couple meta tags and code changes to make a site rank for the needed words to make a living. But then you are an American, maybe that has something to do with it.

I have a client that does around
$160,000.00 per month selling silicone wristbands and I did around $60,000.00 last month selling websites. On both these sites I have seen it takes a lot more than meta tag changes to get the sites where they need to be.

But heck if you can create a website and make a couple little changes and have it making the kind of money you need then more power to you.

I stand corrected.

[weslinda]

Janeth and Chris, lets look at the numbers here.

Dell Computer Google Returns a little over 1,000,000 results.
Apple Computer Google Returns a little over 24,000,000 results

Apple was the first computer company. Wonder why they could rank #1 for computer? And this is a very extreme example in a world that almost no one here works towards or wishes to rank for.

On page factors are important, but are not the only piece to the puzzle. Lets get real here. Using Apple Computer, the 1st computer maker, with 24 million results in Google is really a poor choice to prove your point. No one here works at that level.

#1 Positive Factor in the recent Search Engine Ranking Factors article from SEOMOZ is...Keyword Use In The Title Tag. That is the an on page factor if I remember. This as the feedback from the best of the best in the SEO world.

What's really quite funny, is that this whole debate factors around the name of the post, not the content in my post.

[weslinda]

Rumblepup, thank you for the kind words. I wish people would have read the article, and not simply chosen to compare what is written there versus what is written as the title on the article.

Great news though, we're almost to the top 10 in google for "best on page search engine optimization factors"

I shared in another post how unfortunate this forum has become with so many people simply attacking others, and stooping well below professional and adult conversations. It's really getting old, and must show poorly to those that are new into the forums here.

[nipplecharms1]

Originally Posted by janeth

I am very surprised with your answer. I have found that in most cases it takes a lot more than a couple meta tags and code changes to make a site rank for the needed words to make a living. But then you are an American, maybe that has something to do with it.

I have a client that does around
$160,000.00 per month selling silicone wristbands and I did around $60,000.00 last month selling websites. On both these sites I have seen it takes a lot more than meta tag changes to get the sites where they need to be.

But heck if you can create a website and make a couple little changes and have it making the kind of money you need then more power to you.

I stand corrected.

Hey Janeth, please don’t piss in my cornflakes. That too is an American expression. Who else in the world needs saving again or some free aid? But I digress.

Your friend makes $160K per month? IM me the website and let me look at what you have done for him. And don’t say you don’t have permission!!!!! Only then can we have a real discussion about sites and their makeup.

Let us leave the sarcasm at the door.


Michael, an uncalled-for-attacked third party.

PS, maybe the PUP was onto something!

[janeth]

Originally Posted by weslinda

I shared in another post how unfortunate this forum has become with so many people simply attacking others, and stooping well below professional and adult conversations. It's really getting old, and must show poorly to those that are new into the forums here.

If someone questions what you post, you feel that is an attack?

You feel it would be better to have new members believe that a logo design would help them rank better?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by nipplecharms1

Hey Janeth, please don’t piss in my cornflakes. That too is an American expression. Who else in the world needs saving again or some free aid?

Are you the one saving people?

Please understand I have family in the U.S and I pay some taxes in the U.S as well. As a matter of fact I have one cousin in the special forces, another in the rangers and an uncle that is soon to become a General.

Also understand that I do not get free aid from anyone.

I guess only Americans can post here now?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by weslinda

What's really quite funny, is that this whole debate factors around the name of the post, not the content in my post.

My first post showed where I have a problem with the content as well.

But here is where my problem comes in.

There are many people online making a living doing on site SEO. They work hard at making the list of changes you can make to your website grow.

But the truth is, if you build a nice website for your visitors and through a couple links at it. It will out rank a website that has been SEO'd using the above list every time.

[Chris]

it's pretty obvious apple ranks for the keyword "computer" because of the blue billion backlinks they have pointing to them, making use of the appropriate anchor text in some form or fashion.

the fact that they've been around forever shouldn't really come into play except for perhaps domain age. ibm has been around forever as well and they aren't on the 1st page.

however, like rumblepup said, these discussion all too often lead to personal attacks or statements that can be inferred as such. this is quickly becoming a "never the twain shall meet" discussion and there's really not much point in going back and forth over this, unless you all just want to talk about something.

let's just keep the personal inquisitions out of it please.

back to the subject at hand:

yes, on-page factors are something to consider, especially from the visitors perspective. and if you are in a field that doesn't have a great deal of competition, usually, a title tag change or two, coupled with some good header (linked or not, your choice) and some keyword-friendly text will do wonders on a ranking end - especially if you are dealing with a field that doesn't have SEO-savvy folks working in it.

but - and this is a biggie - as long as search engines employ the algorithms they do (mainly Google), relevant, quality links will always trump on-page stuff.

now. when i say the above, that does not mean stuff like validation and good page structure and good content aren't important. they are. it's the content that gets people to link to your site in the first place. good title tags, well placed headers (linked or not) and non-bot trapping code is what every developer should be striving for to begin with. i don't see why this is still being debated - but a great many of these changes are not going to benefit you from a search perspective.

there is another caveat as well (this is especially for nipplecharms1): all of the on-page changes enacted by the Webnauts crew (some things that have suggested in the some of the other posts you have made in the past i might add) are good for your site, there's no doubt. but your rankings can be very easily comprised if a site that has better backlinks than you do shows up.

just something to keep in mind.

[espmartin]

Hello All,
Very interested in everyone's opinions! I've been doing "hobby" SEO for about 3 years now,
and now SEO for hire...Anyway...

Originally Posted by janeth

I have personally never tested it for myself but I have never seen a site penalized for meta tag stuffing

We all know that penalties have been stated to exist (let's not begin an argument about
Google's Supplemental index ) by the SE's. And I have heard (not sites I've worked on) of
sites that keyword stuffed their way back into Google's 1000 results from top 10's. It may not be as dramatic
as a specific, "Google's webmasters physically removed my site, because they've been watching me!!!" penalty...

But because of "blackhat/greyhat" (please, let's not argue those terms either ) keyword stuffing
techniques, they no longer are trusted to remain as a valid "top 10" resource. That, in IMHO, is penalty enough.

Originally Posted by janeth

But the truth is, if you build a nice website for your visitors and through a couple links at it. It will out rank a website that has been SEO'd using the above list every time.

Please correct me if I'm wrong anyone, but the above list referred to here does not state
that your site, if using every one of these #25 (ok, #26) tips will do great without the use of off-page
SEO. It's more of a On-page primer. At least, that's my 2 cents...

Martin

[Chris]

Originally Posted by weslinda

What's really quite funny, is that this whole debate factors around the name of the post, not the content in my post.

i just went back and re-read how this restarted and quite the opposite occurred. janeth asked for clarification and then proceeded, from her perspective, to pick your initial list apart.

from their, the thread deteriorated back to its normal condition.

[rumblepup]

Ok. I'm back in.

I'm reminded of a certain poster, let's call this poster "Purplehawk" Now, purplehawk would go off on little bitty tirades that had nothing to do with the question at hand.

Here's an example. Purplehawk was absolutely 100% sure that "Trustrank" was a Google property, and even cited a paper on the subject. After 15 pages of posts, threads, and straight up BOLD STATEMENTS he quit the thread, after leaving everyone with sore throats and headaches. He didn't seem to realize that:

a) He was bat s@#t crazy

and

2) He was citing a paper written by Yahoo about a new Yahoo technology which would use Google PR as a qualifier.

Oh the fun we had!! My head was spinning.

Janeth, your on the verge of PurpleHawk territory. Again

The article and the post has nothing to do with SEO, although there was a mention that SEO would be helped. Weslinda even repeated that assertion. The article is about best on page SEO practices, as written about in the overwhelming majority of trusted sources. Is it the end all be all? Heck no. There are a whole bunch of other stuff out there about on page SEO, written by the same sources, that contradict some of these points. But you know what, I've said it before and I'll say it again.

Your all right, and your all wrong.

Janeth, let's not go down the PurpleHawk path. Let's bring it back in, ok?

I would like to suggest that the debate continue about the topic post.

[nipplecharms1]

Originally Posted by janeth

I have a client that does around $160,000.00 per month selling silicone wristbands and I did around $60,000.00 last month selling websites. On both these sites I have seen it takes a lot more than meta tag changes to get the sites where they need to be.


I stand corrected.

Then....

Originally Posted by nipplecharms1

Hey Janeth,...

Your friend makes $160K per month? IM me the website and let me look at what you have done for him. And don’t say you don’t have permission!!!!! Only then can we have a real discussion about sites and their makeup.

Funny, somehow I did not think you would really put your documentation where you mouth is. Janeth, to be honest, I am disappointed in you and your comments. I truly thought better of you.

As the song goes…. Another bites the dust!

Michael

PS no need to bother responding.

[nipplecharms1]

Originally Posted by Chris

there is another caveat as well (this is especially for nipplecharms1): all of the on-page changes enacted by the Webnauts crew (some things that have suggested in the some of the other posts you have made in the past i might add) are good for your site, there's no doubt. but your rankings can be very easily comprised if a site that has better backlinks than you do shows up.

just something to keep in mind.

Thanks Chris, I will keep it in mind. I did state in one of my post here that, in fact, yes I have to start working on back linking. That is something in and of itself and something else I am obviously not good at. I will NOT speak for Webnauts but he has also browbeaten me about getting back links. Its all part and parcel of the same animal I think.

BUT, when everything is even, and you make one change (title, kw and descp metas) that seems to help in your rankings, you have to take pause and think that maybe, just maybe, there is some weight to it.

Honestly, Am I wrong?

Michael

[janeth]

Originally Posted by rumblepup

Janeth, your on the verge of PurpleHawk territory. Again

The article and the post has nothing to do with SEO, although there was a mention that SEO would be helped.

Before comparing me to Ken you really need to read my first post and the answers I was given. But from the post you just made it reads a lot like Kens post.

You and he are not the same are you?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by nipplecharms1

Then....


Funny, somehow I did not think you would really put your documentation where you mouth is. Janeth, to be honest, I am disappointed in you and your comments. I truly thought better of you.

As the song goes…. Another bites the dust!

Michael

PS no need to bother responding.

What do you want to know Michael?


How to do it or how he does it?

[Chris]

again, title tags and keyword-friendly content are very important when it comes to an overall SEO exercise. i will never say otherwise. like i said, it's content that makes people link. think of if it this way - content is the king that attracts links.

as an aside, considering the subject matter of what you sell, you should really consider a visual blog. men love to look at women's breasts... especially on the internet. the images of what you sell will ALWAYS be linkbait.

take this knowledge, go forth and prosper.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Chris

again, title tags and keyword-friendly content are very important when it comes to an overall SEO exercise. i will never say otherwise. like i said, it's content that makes people link. think of if it this way - content is the king that attracts links.

as an aside, considering the subject matter of your what you sell, you should really consider a visual blog. men love to look at women's breasts... especially on the internet. the images of what you sell will ALWAYS be linkbait.

take this knowledge, go forth and prosper.

And the photos needs to be sexy enough to make a girl want it. Getting a man to look is the easy part. (-;

[weslinda]

I presume we'll all have to agree to disagree, I've seen this effort work very efficiently for improved results for a large and very competive keyword for an established site.

No external link building, no other effort was made other than cleaning up the site, and went from page 3-4 in Google for a term with 34,000,000 results to page 1. I know it works, and I don't need to prove anything to anyone else on whether these actions do or do not work.

I won't provide examples because no one here honestly cares, everyone is on their side of the fence and that is where they are staying. I would presume that most haven't read the full blog outlining the deaper implications of each piece of this list. To each his own, we'll all make due with what we can with the skillset we have. If everyone wants to misread a post, or not do their due diligence to understand the post in full, it's not worth discussing in more depth.

That's my 2 cents and as I can see, it's not worth that to many here.

[weslinda]

Originally Posted by janeth

If someone questions what you post, you feel that is an attack?

You feel it would be better to have new members believe that a logo design would help them rank better?

Seriously? That's what you got from the post that shared I'm dissapointed in how so many posts here are turning into attacks? My statement was with regards to the general forum direction vs. your specific posts to me.

Regarding your comment on logos and SEO, I never shared that having a logo improved your SEO. If you read the blog, you would know that and the discussion wouldn't have even gotten to this point.

As previously shared, we simply must agree to disagree, and go on our seperate ways.

[nipplecharms1]

Originally Posted by janeth

What do you want to know Michael?


How to do it or how he does it?

Just tell me the $160K/mo site URL and I will take a look. That simple!

thanks

Michael

[weslinda]

Originally Posted by Chris

i just went back and re-read how this restarted and quite the opposite occurred. janeth asked for clarification and then proceeded, from her perspective, to pick your initial list apart.

from their, the thread deteriorated back to its normal condition.

Chris, in the original point by point reply from Janeth, she shared that in relation to Title Tags, the "Last testing I saw on this showed it did not affect ranking. It was a long time ago and things could have changed. "

This is clearly wrong.

Take two sites, equal on all other footings, backlinks and all, make these changes to the site, and it will improve, without question. I speak from personal experience that it works.

[rumblepup]

Originally Posted by janeth

Before comparing me to Ken you really need to read my first post and the answers I was given. But from the post you just made it reads a lot like Kens post.

You and he are not the same are you?

Doh! You caught me. I is a crazy.

Nah, dat ain't me.

I'm just don't like it when we argue about something that doesn't have to do with the thread. But, this is WPW, where "off track" lives.

So stop hurtin' my feelings.

[weslinda]

How about this, how about a test? I have a site that I have spent very little time on, haven't really done quality coding with, and haven't promoted to get links at all.

I'm looking to redesign the site for a potential income for my wife who stays at home raising our daughter.

Why don't we see how these on page factors can affect a site? We can designate 100 or so keywords / phrases that would be optimal for traffic and we can follow the results over a 1, 3, 6 and 12 month period. How does that sound?

The site is marriedinmaryland.com and everyone can do their research on the site and then we can begin tracking the results. How does that sound? Then we can cleanly test how my system works, and we'll see whether it is a good system, or a bad system, and if traffic increases and advertisements sell.

Right now, we get roughly 80-100 unique visitors a day, amazing since we don't link anywhere but within the site, and only a couple of articles are on the site as content. I'll provide 7 days of traffic numbers next Monday and we'll use that information as a basis for this test.

How does that sound to everyone?

[weslinda]

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html lang="en">
<head>
<title>Maryland Wedding Guide | Getting Married In Maryland | Maryland Brides and Grooms</title>
<meta name="Description" content="Maryland Wedding Resource Guide - Married In Maryland">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<link href="site/styles.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css">

</head>
<body>
<div id="headerdiv">
<div><a href="http://www.marriedinmaryland.com"><img src="images/mim_logo_small.gif" alt="Welcome To MarriedInMaryland.com" width="222" height="65" class="logo"></a></div>
<div class="topads"><a href='http://www.marriedinmaryland.com/ads/adclick.php?n=a09badb8' ><img src='http://www.marriedinmaryland.com/ads/adview.php?what=zone:12&amp;n=a09badb8' border='0' alt='Suppor MIM'></a></div></div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="1"
>
<tr>
<td class="topmenucell"><a href="http://www.marriedinmaryland.com/for_the_bride/index.html" class="topmenucell">For The Bride </a></td>
<td class="topmenucell"><a href="http://www.marriedinmaryland.com/for_the_groom/index.html" class="topmenucell">For The Groom </a></td>
<td class="topmenucell"><a href="http://www.marriedinmaryland.com/your_ceremony/index.html" class="topmenucell">Your Ceremony </a></td>
<td class="topmenucell"><a href="http://www.marriedinmaryland.com/your_reception/index.html" class="topmenucell">Your Reception </a></td>
<td class="topmenucell"><a href="http://www.marriedinmaryland.com/your_honeymoon/index.html" class="topmenucell">Honeymoon &amp; More </a></td>
</tr>
</table>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="topspacer">
<tr>
<td></td>
</tr>
</table>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="maintable">
<tr>
<td valign="top"><div class="articlestable">
<p class="groomheader">Wedding Forums </p>
<p>MarriedInMaryland is dedicated to helping you plan the perfect wedding. On top of our business directory and articles, we've added a new online forum that will allow you to exchange ideas with other Maryland brides. <a href="forum/mim/wed/">Check out our forums</a>, post your questions, and get answers to your most burning wedding questions. </p>
<div class="honeymoonheader">Wedding Articles</div>
<ul class="articleslist"><li><a href="for_the_bride/articles_resources/wedding-planners-your-911-for planning-crisis.html">Wedding Consultants: Your 911 for Planning Crisis</a></li>
<li><a href="your_reception/articles_resources/guide-to-choosing-your-caterer.html">Catering By Numbers: A Guide to Choosing Your Caterer</a></li>
<li><a href="your_ceremony/articles_resources/choosing-the-right-photographer.html">Making It Click: A Guide To Choosing the Right Photographer </a></li>
<li><a href="for_the_bride/articles_resources/dress-to-impress.html">Dress To Impress: A guide to buying your wedding gown in Maryland. </a></li>
<li><a href="for_the_bride/articles_resources/youre_engaged_now_what.htm">You're Engaged, Now What?</a></li>
<li><a href="for_the_groom/articles/engaged_groom_now_what.htm">You've
popped the question! What to do now!</a></li>
<li><a href="your_ceremony/articles_resources/cherish_the_day.htm">Your
special day, cherish it.</a></li>
<li><a href="your_reception/articles_resources/enjoying_the_reception.htm">Friends, family, food, what could go wrong?</a></li>
<li><a href="your_honeymoon/articles_resources/time_to_relax_learn_how.htm">Enjoy
every moment of your honeymoon!</a></li>
</ul>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
</div>
<h1>Maryland Wedding Resources</h1>
<img src="images/home/wedding.jpg" alt="MarriedInMaryland is your source for everything wedding in Maryland." width="443" height="100">
<p>Welcome to Married in Maryland, your single source for wedding resources in the state of Maryland. We are working to build the single largest on line wedding resource guide just for Maryland couples.</p>
<p>We hope that you find this site to be informative and helpful in your search for the perfect caterer, band, and photographers.</p>
<p>We're producing some great articles to help guide you in your search for the perfect vendors for your wedding.</p>
<p>We've also recently added our online wedding forums that offers you a place to exchange ideas with others in Maryland planning their wedding.</p>
<p>Think we need to add something? Just contact us and we'll be glad to try and develop new features that will assist brides to be in their quest for the perfect wedding. </p></td>
</tr>
</table>

<!-- #BeginLibraryItem "/Library/bottom_links.lbi" -->
<div class="bottomdiv"><a href="http://www.marriedinmaryland.com/site_map.html" class="bottomdiv">Site Map</a> - <a href="http://www.marriedinmaryland.com/info/contact.html" class="bottomdiv">Contact Us</a> - <a href="http://www.marriedinmaryland.com/info/add.html" class="bottomdiv">Add Your Site</a> - Site Owned and Operated By <a href="http://www.worldfire.com" class="bottomdiv">WorldFire</a></div>
<script src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
_uacct = "UA-2081392-1";
urchinTracker();
</script>
<!-- #EndLibraryItem -->
</body>
</html>

[weslinda]

There is a copy of the home page code, so everyone knows where we are starting from. Fair enough?

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by nipplecharms1

Just tell me the $160K/mo site URL and I will take a look.

I would like to see that too! Anybody else?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

I would like to see that too! Anybody else?

I find it funny that you two find it so hard to believe. Makes one wonder:

I have posted the link to the site before on the forum. It should not be too hard to find.

[janeth]

I want make you look any longer.

The site is a silicone wristbands website Silicone Wristbands Custom Silicone Bracelets and Rubber Bracelets last time I checked it was hitting at around $140,000.00 per month and climbing. That was back in Feb. All that was coming in from PPP campaign.

The PPP is still running and there is no desire from the client to stop that but we are now going to start optimizing the site for the search engines as well as run the PPP.

We did the design on the site back in Dec. and have been doing monthly updates since then.

Please feel free to tear the site apart.

It can only help us to make it better. (-:

[Webnauts]

Janeth,

1. Are you are talking about PPC? Who is talking about PPC here? The discussion here is about on-page factors. Or did I miss something on the path to confusion?
2. Oh, PPP? Paid Per Performance? Based on what? PayPerPost, RockStartUp, PostieCon, Blogger's Choice Awards, PayPerPost Gear?
2. If the client is so happy, why do they want their site be optimized for search engines? Or posed otherwise, what do you mean with optimizing? Linking strategy?
3. I know why you tell us to tear the site apart. Unfortunately I do not optimize sites for competitors for free, so they can earn the cash.
4. If you want the site to be reviewed, please start a thread in the site reviews forums.

And off-above-points. Noscript tag in the document headers? Is that HTML for Google?

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

Please feel free to tear the site apart.

It can only help us to make it better. (-:

Anyway Janeth, reading all your posts in this thread, I do not believe that someone can do that job better than you.

[janeth]

Let me answer your questions for you.

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Janeth,

1. Are you are talking about PPC? Who is talking about PPC here? The discussion here is about on-page factors. Or did I miss something on the path to confusion?

I said that I had a customer that does over $160,000.00 per month I did not say how he did it. But I did say that it takes a lot more then meta tags.

Originally Posted by Webnauts

2. Oh, PPP? Paid Per Performance? Based on what? PayPerPost, RockStartUp, PostieCon, Blogger's Choice Awards, PayPerPost Gear?

There is a PPP but I meant PPC but from the above post I want even try and explain that to you.

Originally Posted by Webnauts

2. If the client is so happy, why do they want their site be optimized for search engines? Or posed otherwise, what do you mean with optimizing? Linking strategy?

WHILE I need to explain to you why the client would like to make more money. Now that is a good one. I'll leave this one for a book I might write one day.

Originally Posted by Webnauts

3. I know why you tell us to tear the site apart. Unfortunately I do not optimize sites for competitors for free, so they can earn the cash.

We are not competitors, I've never considered you to be any type of competition for me. (-;

Originally Posted by Webnauts

4. If you want the site to be reviewed, please start a thread in the site reviews forums.

And off-above-points. Noscript tag in the document headers? Is that HTML for Google?

You asked for the site and I showed it to you. I figured you would want to try and come up with something to run your mouth about so I said have at it.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Anyway Janeth, reading all your posts in this thread, I do not believe that someone can do that job better than you.

I do rank number one for your name on MSN

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

I do rank number one for your name on MSN

Just to support your spitefulness, we were ranking very well in MSN, better than Google and Yahoo, but as our provider messed up and our site was 4 days and nights down, MSN penalized us. But we hope to recover, as we have moved to a new hosting company in the US last week.

And admins, mods and other members here know already your intention of putting that article about SEO Workers on your blog.

But I think after that war, we agreed to make piece. So lets leave that out of here.

I hope you recognized that you are getting offensive again. I hope it will end here.

Peace.

[Webnauts]

A friendly reminder for all members in this thread:

WebProWorld Forum Rules

Inappropriate Behavior:
DO NOT Make Inappropriate or Offensive Posts - including threats, harrassment, swearing, prejudice, slander or deliberate insults/name-calling, or other negative remarks about WebProWorld, its moderators and administrators, iEntry, or your fellow members. Even if this is just your own personal opinion, RESPECT YOUR FELLOW MEMBERS

Do NOT drag another member's personal site into a forum discussion unless the discussion directly involves that site OR if the member brings his or her own site into the discussion first. There's no point in ruining a good debate by accidentally (or intentionally) offending someone with a personal comment.

Thanks for your attention.

Back to topic ladies and gentlemen.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

Let me answer your questions for you.



I said that I had a customer that does over $160,000.00 per month I did not say how he did it. But I did say that it takes a lot more then meta tags.

Obviously right!

Originally Posted by janeth

There is a PPP but I meant PPC but from the above post I want even try and explain that to you.

You should of done that. Because there is PPP and PPC. Anyway.

Originally Posted by janeth

WHILE I need to explain to you why the client would like to make more money. Now that is a good one. I'll leave this one for a book I might write one day.

Tell me where I can buy it if you are done.

Originally Posted by janeth

We are not competitors, I've never considered you to be any type of competition for me. (-;

Me either. Well do I get a piece of the cake if I help you out?

Originally Posted by janeth

You asked for the site and I showed it to you. I figured you would want to try and come up with something to run your mouth about so I said have at it.

I think someone else asked here, and I just got curious.

Thanks for the feedback Janeth.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Just to support your spitefulness, we were ranking very well in MSN, better than Google and Yahoo, but as our provider messed up and our site was 4 days and nights down, MSN penalized us. But we hope to recover, as we have moved to a new hosting company in the US last week.

And admins, mods and other members here know already your intention of putting that article about SEO Workers on your blog.

But I think after that war, we agreed to make piece. So lets leave that out of here.

I hope you recognized that you are getting offensive again. I hope it will end here.

Peace.

I do try to respond in the same manner that I am treated.