Best On Page SEO Factors

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

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

I do not see where I have treated you that way in this whole discussion. I will ask our admins and co-mods to look into this issue. OK?

So lets get back to the topic. OK?

Thanks.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

what do you mean with optimizing? Linking strategy?

I forgot to explain this one to you.

First I do not do search engine optimization nor do I sell it as a service. I am doing this for this client for free. I am his web designer and he is a super nice guy.

Everything in life is not about money (;

You asked what I was going to do.

I will put together 20,000 keywords and set up one page for a couple of the keywords. Then I will add some text, a couple links and watch the pages start to rank on the search engines for the keywords.

I will add the keywords into the title and meta tags but that will be about it for my SEO. Once I finish with the first 20,000 I'll pick another 20,000 and do the same thing. I am doing this more for fun than anything else.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

I forgot to explain this one to you.

First I do not do search engine optimization nor do I sell it as a service. I am doing this for this client for free. I am his web designer and he is a super nice guy.

Everything in life is not about money (;

You asked what I was going to do.

I will put together 20,000 keywords and set up one page for a couple of the keywords. Then I will add some text, a couple links and watch the pages start to rank on the search engines for the keywords.

I will add the keywords into the title and meta tags but that will be about it for my SEO. Once I finish with the first 20,000 I'll pick another 20,000 and do the same thing. I am doing this more for fun than anything else.

That sounds cool to me! I did the same for my client Manolya Hotel. If I design a site, those services are done per default. Good work!

Here we are on the same boat.

[saikatblogger]

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?

Though I am new to this field, but allow me to post my experience here:

I worked for a site that offers a specific service for U.S. citizens and it rank first in the SE for the main targeted keyword. I must mention here that one wikipedia page ranks 2/3 for the same keyword.

Now when I check the keyword in google.co.in I can see wikipedia page at the top and my site at 2/3 position. Why so?

Here is my guess:
Since the service is quite common in U.S. people can directly come to my site and browse it, but people from other countries are not aware of this thing, so they prefer to learn it from wikipedia, hence they go to the wikipedia page for the same query search. And Google tracks that.

[rumblepup]

I'm going to ask that the personal debate stop now. or I'll ask for the thread to be locked.

This thread is about the merits of the article.

Weslinda, GREAT NEWS! this thread comes up number two on Google for "Best On Page SEO Factors" I hope your article is getting the click through's it deserves.

[incrediblehelp]

Any reason this website is down?

http://www.wristbands-with-a-message.com/

[weslinda]

Rumblepup...nice...I don't think I'm getting much traffic, but hey, maybe now people will realize why I named the post the way that I did.

[weslinda]

Incredible...maybe they were just selling so much...

[janeth]

Originally Posted by incrediblehelp

Any reason this website is down?

http://www.wristbands-with-a-message.com/

We are having some server problems. The company said they should be fixed in the next couple hours.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by saikatblogger

Here is my guess:
Since the service is quite common in U.S. people can directly come to my site and browse it, but people from other countries are not aware of this thing, so they prefer to learn it from wikipedia, hence they go to the wikipedia page for the same query search. And Google tracks that.

If only Google was that smart. lol

Here is my guest

The sever for the first company is located in the U.S and the links going to the site are manly from the U.S.

Google understands it to be a U.S company and ranks it as a U.S company. If they moved the server to the UK you would see them drop from the #1 spot.

[Chris]

Originally Posted by saikatblogger

Though I am new to this field, but allow me to post my experience here:

I worked for a site that offers a specific service for U.S. citizens and it rank first in the SE for the main targeted keyword. I must mention here that one wikipedia page ranks 2/3 for the same keyword.

Now when I check the keyword in google.co.in I can see wikipedia page at the top and my site at 2/3 position. Why so?

Here is my guess:
Since the service is quite common in U.S. people can directly come to my site and browse it, but people from other countries are not aware of this thing, so they prefer to learn it from wikipedia, hence they go to the wikipedia page for the same query search. And Google tracks that.

it's not that complicated. Google favors Wikipedia and considers them an authority on many, many topics. however, this is quickly going to become a favorED because of Wiki's nofollow link policy.

Google doesn't care how many visitors a site gets when it comes to rankings nor do they track which site receives the most visitors. the clearest example for this is to conduct a search on the word "search". Google is not in the 1st position but i promise they get a helluva lot more visitors than the number 1 site does.

[saikatblogger]

Originally Posted by Chris

it's not that complicated. Google favors Wikipedia and considers them an authority on many, many topics. however, this is quickly going to become a favorED because of Wiki's nofollow link policy.

Google doesn't care how many visitors a site gets when it comes to rankings nor do they track which site receives the most visitors. the clearest example for this is to conduct a search on the word "search". Google is not in the 1st position but i promise they get a helluva lot more visitors than the number 1 site does.

I understand that Wikipedia is an authoritative site. Then why it comes 2nd in .com and comes 1st in .co.in? Let's take an example:

Site A and Site B both have all the features to rank good in SE. But Site A looks very bad and Site B looks good. People like to read info at Site B, not at Site A. Then which site will rank higher?

Thanks for the example Chris, I will think more on it.

[incrediblehelp]

Originally Posted by saikatblogger

Site A and Site B both have all the features to rank good in SE. But Site A looks very bad and Site B looks good. People like to read info at Site B, not at Site A. Then which site will rank higher?

Huh? What does cosmetics have to do with rankings?

[kgun]

Originally Posted by Chris

i'm not sure how a visually appealing site is any more search-friendly than an ugly site. if they both have good on-page content and decent backlinks, they will both rank well... right?

and i'm talking from the perspective that every thing is equal w/the two sites.

Yes, that is the clue.

You must think like a (make life easy for the) Bot, but write for human beings.

[phx-keith]

Nice Job. Will make an interesting article.

One thing you might want to add is SEO relevant stuff like search phrase research and inbound links. After all a website without SEO is like a car without gas. It's not going anywhere!

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by phx-keith

Nice Job. Will make an interesting article.

One thing you might want to add is SEO relevant stuff like search phrase research and inbound links. After all a website without SEO is like a car without gas. It's not going anywhere!

Inbound links is an off-page factor. The topic here is about on-page SEO factors.

[kgun]

Yes, and I noted this

Originally Posted by Chris

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.

My bolding.

John, how do you interpret that?

What about negative onsite factors?

[weslinda]

Even though no one has accepted my challenge, I am providing a capture of the current site at MIM for everyone to catalog the look and feel and changes we've made. I also uploaded the original home page information above. I'll post stats in the next 24-48 hours and I'll let everyone know when the new site goes live with the changes I recommend in my article. We will put no external marketing, or promotion into the site and we'll watch and see if these changes will or will not affect your overall rankings, and traffic.

I know they will, but I'd like to offer a real world test for everyone to see.

[Webnauts]

Wes it would be a cool if you monitor the site and report some results.
I am looking very much forward.

[ukresident]

I must agree with Janeth here.

Now, I'm not saying that all the items on the list are not imprtant, some of them are but one should not dwell too much on some of them and instead focus on creating original compelling content that others will want to link to.

Example of an item not to waste your time on - HTML validation:

Here is what Matt Cutts has to say about it:

"Validation is not necessary. Compelling content is more important than validation."

See it for yourself:

Optimize for Search Engines or Users?

Just to stress my point, try running the Google, Yahoo and MSN homepages through the W3C HTML Validator, here are the results:

Google: 48 errors
Yahoo: 34 errors
MSN: They actually pass (they just have too much time on their hand I guess)

My point being, while its good to keep a checklist of the items in the subject list, don't waste too much of your time on most of them as it would be counter productive (especially for the newbies among us).

As I said before create compelling original content that others will want to link to and make sure that each of your pages is visible to the search engines has at least a unique title tag and is internally linked to with keyword anchor text.

[weslinda]

How hard is it to validate UK? Really? I mean, as "newbies" go, this should be one of the most important things, as people should learn how to build a web site properly from day one, so that they will have substantially less issues with the site in the future.

Everyone that had hacks in place for every little trick they wanted to do, or have created poor designs in the first place have to go back and check those sites each time a new version of Internet Explorer comes out. Me, I don't have to do that. I protect myself from long term fixing and reworks by using quality easy to write standards based code.

Validation isn't rocket science, and honestly takes me an additional 15-30 seconds for each page I'm working on.

I must say Koodos to MSN, this is obviously the first engine to take validation seriously. And they go XHTML 1.0 Strict. I think this will be an omen for the future. Their results pages do not validate, but they are not far off, on one search I just did, only 6 errors on the results page.

As a professional, I'm sick of people slacking off on quality design because they "don't have time" for it. It isn't hard folks, it really isn't. It doesn't double my workload on a site, it actually reduces it, because if I build I template cleanly, I don't have to spend so much time testing 8 different browsers because I know what works and what doesn't work.

This article is about on-page variables everyone should work on, not the only things you should do for quality SEO. This does not debate the value of good content, or quality IBL's or anything along those lines. It is simply a discussion of how a web page should be built by those looking to do a reputable and solid design.

And in turn, it will help your web sites standings in the search engines.

[weslinda]

Webnauts, we are just a couple of days from launching the flip of this site, I have to say, it's been a lot of work, but well worth it. I can't wait to see the numbers myself, and we'll see if anyone believes the numbers or if it simply becomes a "well the pieces that affect ranking" did it for you, and blah blah blah...

[ukresident]

Validation might be easy for you as a seasoned webmaster but you'd be surprised how difficult it is for many.

I'm not saying don't validate, by all means do if you can but if you can't or don't know how to, then don't sweat about it, you'll still rank and rank better than validating sites if you have good content.

[weslinda]

UKResident...have you read the whole thread? Every time I've made the statement that these are variables that if two sites are on the same page with everything else, this will help them improve.

I'm not discussing links, or content, or anything else in this post. Just on-page factors, and everyone keeps attempting to spin it to off page factors.

If you spend a month working on pages, and then validating them with the tools available, after less than a month, you'll have a really good clue what you can and can't put in a page.

The issue is that most people use so many tags that are unneeded and that's where the issues come in with validation. I design my pages with lighter and lighter code with each new site as I realize how things flow.

If you want to be a quality web site designer, you should be working hard to do things as well as you can, not focusing on how to pump out as much as you can because you can.

Quality, not quantity is always best in this world. And validation isn't only about ranking, another point that really frustrates me when people discuss validation. They only want to limit something in terms of ranking in search engines.

The whole idea behind a solid web site design is to provide the best experience for any user that visits your web site, no matter what browser they are using, no matter what their handicap might be, no matter what speed of a connection they are on. They should be able to get an enjoyable experience out of your site.

You certainly wouldn't want your mechanic to take this type of stand when working on your car, why do companies want to trust their web sites to people with the same mentality? That's honestly what shocks me.

[ukresident]

I was just replying to the debate between webnauts and Janeth, and please note that I did acknowledge your list by saying "while its good to keep a checklist of the items in the subject list..."

[weslinda]

Your full response was "don't waste too much of your time on most of them as it would be counter productive ". Doesn't sound like much of a validation of any of the items in the list.

And my replies are what they are, a request to know why so many people choose to do things half heartedly and not learn how to do something well.

[ukresident]

I simply don't agree that validation has anything to do with ranking (this was backed up by Matt's Video). Nevertheless I did acknowledge your list but I said don't waste your time on it especially for those who don't know how to do it.

[perry321]

"Perry, I think that discounting SEO is not the way to win many over here."

So I'm suppose to win people over here?

And I'm not discounting it entirely. Never have. Never will. I just don't scour message boards and read dozens of books and onloine articles for hours on end, saying stuff like: "Oh, I HAVE to figure this out! What can I do to get my site listed?!!"

lol uh, no.

"These are 25 pieces that I believe every web site should contain if at all possible, and as noted, we've missed a couple that should be included and haven't been."

Some of them I agree with, but isn't this breadcrumb naviagtion thing the same as pages linked together by other means, like page numbers?

About.com does this. But they are one HUGE site.

Just curious.


You don't need to advertise? Then you are working another job, you don't have that many bills, or both. I envy you if you don't have that many bills.

Like I said before, if it doesn't hurt anything, put everything in. Why some even question if it works or not boggles me. Just put it in anyway to cover the bases. It doesn't take that long to do.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by weslinda

Webnauts, we are just a couple of days from launching the flip of this site, I have to say, it's been a lot of work, but well worth it. I can't wait to see the numbers myself, and we'll see if anyone believes the numbers or if it simply becomes a "well the pieces that affect ranking" did it for you, and blah blah blah...

Dear members I would kindly appreciate your attention!

My answer to the question is perfect described from my post and below it here: validator.w3.org

I seriously suggest everyone to look at that that, so this validation story will have an end after all.

And, a lot of thanks to our admin Mike, that he could help me to clarify this issue.

[perry321]

Um, all due respect, weslinda lol there are a couple things that are going for you: Your URL are those keywords. And Maryland isn't a very big state, so there aren't that many site owners doing the same thing. I had forgotten the search engine, some rinky dink one, but I typed in "married," which is part of your URL, and you showed up on page two.

So, duh. Nice try, though.

80-100 vistors??? You should add other products to increase your odds in selling to the ones who aren't interested in your services. Gifts, cards, novelty items....

You should also make more sites and connect that one to them, and show it to those 80-100 for more possible sales.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by perry321

"
Some of them I agree with, but isn't this breadcrumb naviagtion thing the same as pages linked together by other means, like page numbers?

About.com does this. But they are one HUGE site.

Just curious.

Using page numbers is called pagination, not breadcrumbs.

[perry321]

Gotchya. But don't they both do the same thing? Doesn't this link, as an example, do the same thing, also?: Check out these wholesale prices.... And it goes to another page in the site. And so on and so on.

I'm just curious. If it does, why even have an article on it? Why even give it a name? Okay, who has the big ego to come up with this???

[weslinda]

Perry, the point of "marriedinmaryland" is that it is a dead site, one I haven't done much with in a ton of time. Married is not one of the top search terms when it comes to weddings and maryland, which has a few people in it as a state. So changing the site to show what changes take place traffic wise is an easy thing to do.

Regarding Maryland Stats, there are roughly 6 million people in the state of maryland.

The top search terms according to Overture and others are...and this is a very abbreviated list of what we would want to aim for.

Maryland Wedding
Wedding In Maryland
Maryland Wedding Photographer
Wedding Reception Maryland
Wedding Photography Maryland
Wedding Reception Site in Maryland
and so on...

Married In Maryland is not near any of the top keywords for the site Perry, so I don't think we can simply dismiss this as a "you've got the keyword in your domain name" issue. I'm simply flipping a site that has been out there for quite a long time, and doing it using the techniques in the article, then I'll report what changes happen.

The key with using this site as an open example is to show the traffic increases these changes can make. I've done this on a much larger site, in a much more competetive environment and noticed very solid ranking changes on very competetive keywords.

Regarding the question on Breadcrumbs, the key behind "breadcrumbs" is to give visitors a "trail" to go backwards without having to use the back button. It allows them to navigate back up the line towards the home page to the level they want to be on.

This started with the very first directory such as DMOZ and has been out there since. I don't think I gave it the name, and I think it was around and accepted as quality well before I came along.

I love to hear this is a hot topic though, and I hope that if nothing else, it will encourage designers to have a bit of pride and choose to do things well, with the best of quality, and not take any shortcuts. Of course, I see that is an unpopular idea around here at least.

[perry321]

Well, weslinda, dead site or not, and even though you are going to experiment with it, you should take advantage of those 100 or so visitors sometime in the future, if the experiment doesn't work.

Just a thought. That's all.

"So changing the site to show what changes take place traffic wise is an easy thing to do."

To a point, I agree.

Anyway, it's a nice-looking site.


"Married In Maryland is not near any of the top keywords for the site Perry, so I don't think we can simply dismiss this as a 'you've got the keyword in your domain name' issue."

Agreed. But you'd be surprised by so many who brag (not saying you have) that they are on page one. And it turns out that the keyword(s) are part of ther URL, and, it is on keywords not many would type in anyway. .


"I'm simply flipping a site that has been out there for quite a long time, and doing it using the techniques in the article, then I'll report what changes happen."

The key with using this site as an open example is to show the traffic increases these changes can make. I've done this on a much larger site, in a much more competetive environment and noticed very solid ranking changes on very competetive keywords."

I understand. I'll be in the audience watching. Got any popcorn?


"Regarding the question on Breadcrumbs, the key behind "breadcrumbs" is to give visitors a "trail" to go backwards without having to use the back button. It allows them to navigate back up the line towards the home page to the level they want to be on."

Okay, so this is for the users. Thank you for clearing that up.

I have something similar. Or I am going to. I am changing out the page numbers for that. Screw the engines. I care more about the customers who came in from my ads, which is what this trail is for anyway.


"This started with the very first directory such as DMOZ and has been out there since. I don't think I gave it the name, and I think it was around and accepted as quality well before I came along."

Yeah, I remember it.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by perry321

"Married In Maryland is not near any of the top keywords for the site Perry, so I don't think we can simply dismiss this as a 'you've got the keyword in your domain name' issue."

Good point. But can you explain how the domain name can be a factor to your opinion?

Originally Posted by perry321

"I'm simply flipping a site that has been out there for quite a long time, and doing it using the techniques in the article, then I'll report what changes happen."

The key with using this site as an open example is to show the traffic increases these changes can make. I've done this on a much larger site, in a much more competetive environment and noticed very solid ranking changes on very competetive keywords."

I understand. I'll be in the audience watching. Got any popcorn?

Are you claiming here that if a web site is not visually appealing, accessible and usable for the users it can generate sells? Just curious...

Originally Posted by perry321

"Regarding the question on Breadcrumbs, the key behind "breadcrumbs" is to give visitors a "trail" to go backwards without having to use the back button. It allows them to navigate back up the line towards the home page to the level they want to be on."

Okay, so this is for the users. Thank you for clearing that up.

I don't think that is cleaned up already. Did you ever hear about the the weight of text links? Don't internal text links have weight? Just wondering...

Originally Posted by perry321

I have something similar. Or I am going to. I am changing out the page numbers for that. Screw the engines. I care more about the customers who came in from my ads, which is what this trail is for anyway.

Screw the engines? How can you do that? You can only screw the engines if you screw your customers!!!

Did you see my quote in the footers of my main sites?

- Optimizing for Search Engines, with Humans in Mind. (you can turn this around if you want).
- Consulting & Training with Web Accessibility, Search Engines and Usability in Mind.

So can you please be here a bit more specific?

Originally Posted by perry321

"This started with the very first directory such as DMOZ and has been out there since. I don't think I gave it the name, and I think it was around and accepted as quality well before I came along."
Yeah, I remember it.

Where you ever involved in Web Accessibility and Usability? If I read your statements, you seem not to have any idea about all that! Or did I miss something again?

[weslinda]

Perry321: I'll try and write this as simply as I can. For all to get the notion here. MIM is out there, as an idea I started a few years back, and just haven't gotten anywhere with for lack of time and focus on that specific issue.

I'm bringing it back alive for this specific post, and to show what these changes can do to affect a sites traffic through the search engines. I've gotten sites, which are much larger by the way, to first page of Google for fairly competetive keyword terms. Maryland wedding stuff is a fairly trafficked environment, while not quite as competetive as "search engine optimization" but still a nitch that can be quite competetive and quite worthwhile.

These changes that I reccomend each and every web site start with, show quality and give a web site a leg up on the competition. Of course, this is not everything you can do from a SEO standpoint, but rather this is the foundation for your mansion to be built upon. The more sold the foundation, the longer the home will last, if you use the right materials throughout the rest of the house.

I believe in quality, and take pride in the work I produce. I do not take pride in simply throwing up whatever poorly coded exscuse for a web site many people choose to produce while claiming to be a professional.

I did the same in the past, mostly out of ignorance to standards, not knowing they even existed, and my hope is to educate those "newbies" that have been mentioned to what the possibilities are, and how they can proceed. I also want to show those in the community that these changes are positives to your web site, and can seriously affect traffic without any other tools being put in place.

I feel the web design and Search Engine Optimization industries have such bad images because so many people have chosen to do such poor work for their clients, friends, neighbors, fellow churchgoers and so forth. I want to see that trend change, and more people take pride in their work and put forth a quality, well formed product for their clients.

[perry321]

It's alright, weslinda, I understood the first time. I think there was just a miscommunication.


"Are you claiming here that if a web site is not visually appealing, accessible and usable for the users it can generate sells? Just curious..."

If you are talking to me, webnauts, I was quoting weslinda. I guess I should use that quote button, huh?


"I don't think that is cleaned up already. Did you ever hear about the the weight of text links? Don't internal text links have weight? Just wondering..."

Are you talking to me? If so....yeah, I agree. I do it. Or I am in the process of doing it. But I am mainly changing out the page numbers for text links as a trail for my visitors to navigate more easily back and forth. Crude example: "Check out this dating tip that worked for guys like you >>>"

And yeah, have some more keywords, like "dating tip," also! Bleeeeeah.


"Screw the engines? How can you do that? You can only screw the engines if you screw your customers!!!"

I don't fully understand what you mean.

If I understand you correctly, I meant that I don't dwell for hours on end trying to figure out if this works, and if that works, and why this page isn't being spidered, and so on and so on.... It's too freakin' taxing, and in the long run it ain't worth it. I focus on cheap advertising instead. I'll put up a well-optimized site, and then leave it. And I know it is done right, and FULLY optimized.

Last year I was, WAS, on page one, two, and sometimes three for several keywords, and I didn't even know about optimizing a site! And, yes, I still considered my placements the luck of the draw, because everybody and their brother was doing the same thing, and there were "experts" out there doing it.

I got a few hundred hits a day. I got, maybe, one sale every couple of weeks, if that. Why? Because just about everbody were curiosity seekers, window shoppers, teenagers, and women going to the site that was built for men.

With targeted advertising, I made the kind of money that is expected. Another reason why I don't put much stock in engines. I'll optiize it, and then leave it.

This is what I meant when I said screw it. If I am one of the lucky ones who lands on page one, fine. If not, who cares. It's not THAT big of a deal.

Hell I don't even have a high ranking. I don't think I am even being shown in Alexa. I don't care. I get plenty of traffic from advertising. One nerd sent me an e-mail pointing out that I have NO rank. Yeah, and? He doesn't know how many monthly visitors I get, either. For most, NOT ALL, sites, rank means zilch.

A lot of website owners here can relate to not seeing sales via search engines, even though they are on page one, two, or three, even. They won't admit it, but they can relate.

I know I am stepping on your toes, but....


"Where you ever involved in Web Accessibility and Usability? If I read your statements, you seem not to have any idea about all that! Or did I miss something again?"

I'm just a simple smartass, er, I mean, guy, who has a simple website, who goes lookin' for cheap advertising. I don't get involved in it all, waist deep, like you guys do.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by perry321

If you are talking to me, webnauts, I was quoting weslinda. I guess I should use that quote button, huh?

That would be nice if you would.

Originally Posted by perry321

"Screw the engines? How can you do that? You can only screw the engines if you screw your customers!!!"

I don't fully understand what you mean.

If you do not optimize for customers, you screw in search engines and in business. Have a look at this article: End Searcher Optimization: The New SEO

Originally Posted by perry321

Last year I was, WAS, on page one, two, and sometimes three for several keywords, and I didn't even know about optimizing a site! And, yes, I still considered my placements the luck of the draw, because everybody and their brother was doing the same thing, and there were "experts" out there doing it.

Last year? And now? And which keywords?

Originally Posted by perry321

I got a few hundred hits a day. I got, maybe, one sale every couple of weeks, if that. Why? Because just about everbody were curiosity seekers, window shoppers, teenagers, and women going to the site that was built for men.

With targeted advertising, I made the kind of money that is expected. Another reason why I don't put much stock in engines. I'll optiize it, and then leave it.

This is what I meant when I said screw it. If I am one of the lucky ones who lands on page one, fine. If not, who cares. It's not THAT big of a deal.

If you are happy with your conversions then it is OK.

But I would not be able to live with them, and see here why: US E-Commerce Website Conversion rates 2007

Originally Posted by perry321

Hell I don't even have a high ranking. I don't think I am even being shown in Alexa. I don't care. I get plenty of traffic from advertising. One nerd sent me an e-mail pointing out that I have NO rank. Yeah, and? He doesn't know how many monthly visitors I get, either. For most, NOT ALL, sites, rank means zilch.

A lot of website owners here can relate to not seeing sales via search engines, even though they are on page one, two, or three, even. They won't admit it, but they can relate.

I know I am stepping on your toes, but....

I do not think that you can step on my toe buddy. Because:

Search engine rankings and conversions can be crucial to every company:

• Searching has now reached the point where it is as a common task as using email. Recent studies indicate that using a search engine is a task performed regularly by 91% of Internet users.
• Research shows that at least 3 out of 4 "click-throughs" from search engines come from the organic search results rather than from paid advertisements (Pay Per Click) on the same results pages.
• Poor ranking in the organic search results means that your web site is failing to reach a large number of potential customers. I cannot let my competition beat me to top organic search engine placements.

Originally Posted by webnauts

"Where you ever involved in Web Accessibility and Usability? If I read your statements, you seem not to have any idea about all that! Or did I miss something again?"

Originally Posted by perry321

I'm just a simple smartass, er, I mean, guy, who has a simple website, who goes lookin' for cheap advertising. I don't get involved in it all, waist deep, like you guys do.

I think you should read my articles why myself and others here do not feel that we waist deep:
Why accessibility is important to you
Why usability is important to you

[perry321]

"Last year? And now? And which keywords?"


Nothing now. I don't even remember which keywords. One waas 'women dating," which would also came up under dating women. My memory sucks canal water.

Originally Posted by Webnauts

If you do not optimize for customers, you screw in search engines and in business.

It's no loss, webnauts. Maybe for some. I know those few dollars add up, but it was so little, it wasn't, and STILL isn't worth it. My plate is full looking for more advertising avenues.

Originally Posted by Webnauts

If you are happy with your conversions then it is OK.

But I would not be able to live with them, and see here why: US E-Commerce Website Conversion rates 2007

I wasn't happy with it.

Yeah, I think I read that article. It doesn't tell the whole story, though. People LOOKING to buy something is at around that rate.

The rate is MUCH lower than that for the curiosity seekers, the window shoppers, and the tire kickers. Of course.

It's ok during the holidays, and whatnot, but for the rest of the year, many times it isn't at that rate.

That's what I hate about these "experts." They don't tell the whole story, and then when Jimmy comes in with his site, he wonders why he isn't getting at least one sale out of 50 or so visitors.

It really pisses me off. That's why I am so headstrong on this SEO stuff. I'm not discounting SEO, but I'm not going to put a silver lining around it either. I know better. Not everything is being told, and so much common sense is left at the door.

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Search engine rankings and conversions can be crucial to every company:

"Crucial"??? Sorry, but no. They get their real $ from advertising. And many (NOT ALL), big and small businesses, know that just because they are on page one doesn't mean squat. They found that out firsthand.

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Searching has now reached the point where it is as a common task as using email. Recent studies indicate that using a search engine is a task performed regularly by 91% of Internet users.

I agree. But how many are window shoppers? How many are tire kickers? How many are curiosity seekers?

There are a lot (NOT ALL) of website owners who are on page one, but they see, maybe, a hundred, if that many visitors a day. I spoked with two last week who gets, maybe 60. That's just the way it is with many sites.

Come on, man, you know this.

Yes, we get the window shoppers with ads, also, but I don't have to rack my brain with over-hyped search engines. Will this work? Will that work? Why wasn't this page spidered? Why am I now on page 34? On and on and on.... And for what? A sale every week or so, if that???

Now don't get me going!

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Research shows that at least 3 out of 4 "click-throughs" from search engines come from the organic search results rather than from paid advertisements (Pay Per Click) on the same results pages.

Ok, now this is one of those times when the whole story isn't being told, or it is just plain BS.

I have read this too. Ya gotta ask yourself: What sites are they talking about? And, how much advertising are they ACTUALLY doing?

But since thousands don't click on that link in a search engine every day, I'm going to say that is BS.

Prescription drugs, next to ***** enlargement supplements are BIG on search engines. Excuse the pun. I know for a fact that even the ones on page one don't get thousands of hits a day. They will get it every week, though. Advertising, on the other hand....

I, for example, could be on page one under several good keywords, and I wil still get ten times more clicks from my advertising, both on and offline.

More "experts." Please.

Come on, now, webnauts, think about it.

Is this one of these times when we can agree to disagree?

Is it, huh? Is it? Is it? Huh?

I'm off to bed to dream about beer and big-breasted women.

Have a good night.

[Webnauts]

Perry no further comments.

I hope others will read our last posts and share with us their thoughts. I guess the problem is that we are just talking a different language.

You give me the feeling that you consider all of us experts here that we dumb, so I do not want to draw myself down to a level that I even have been the time I have been a novice, when I first began learning and working on the web.

Sorry buddy, but I guess you might find someone else who can deal with your top level. Your level is probably too advance for me.

Sorry. I have a lot work to do now. Sleep well.

[weslinda]

Okay...while I love the great debate we've started, I'd like to get back to the core of our focus. I'd like to share the 1 week stats as compiled by Google Analytics. I'm including three screen captures so everyone can see what we're working with.

This will serve as our baseline for future results.

[weslinda]

I hope to have the new site launched within 24-48 hours, will let everyone know when we have updated to the new version of the web site. I think this will be an interesting test for all of us.

[Webnauts]

WOW!!! That is great Wes. Keep us up-to-date man.

[weslinda]

Okay, a bit delayed, but I have launched the new look and feel of the site. We have changed one area of the site by upgrading our wedding forums to a new software package that we feel is going to be more attractive to our visitors.

The issue with the package is that it is going to take a little work to get it up to the specs we'd like to see with it. But we hope to have it tuned in within the next 1-2 weeks.

Also, our search results page will be worked on. There are some validation issues within the results that we have to work to improve on.

Everyone can feel free to visit marriedinmaryland.com and tell us what you think of the new look and feel of the site. I am also including a screen capture of the home page to compare to the old version.

[crankydave]

First off, nice list weslinda. Second, I like the look and redesign of the site. I've little doubt that that the change in placements alone will generate positive results. I look forward to the updates.

This is not to start (restart) a "firestorm" but just to share my thoughts...

When it comes to actual SE rankings and/or traffic, I tend to agree with some of the other comments in the thread that express there may be little to no influence on traffic or rankings but that certainly does not diminish the value of the list when it comes to building a site.

One such thing would be the meta description. While Yahoo does place some positive ranking value for what is contained in the meta description, Google does not. HOWEVER improper use of the meta description *can* cause a negative effect in Google ie pages placed in the SI.

There are some instances where not using a meta description at all can have a better effect on click throughs and traffic than using one. A site/page/directory that primarily lists a schedule of events or regional events would be an example. By not using the description you force the SE's to pull the relevent display text from the actual listing which can result in better click throughs/traffic for specific queries.

I've had some lengthy discussions with someone I believe to be a very competent SEO that's an advocate of never using a meta description but that's a discussion for another thread.

Weslinda... I do look forward to your updates and discussing any conclusions which are drawn.

Dave

[weslinda]

Dave,

I'm sure that we'll see some positive results, and I'm sure there are many things in my list that will be debated until the end of time.

I'm sure that the changes will have a solid affect and I can't wait to see what happens.

Regarding the Meta Description Tag, in my article, I go into depth of using it to attempt to improve click throughs, as I've had Google and most engines use the Meta Description tag as their description when it has been written properly.

Of course, firestorms are a regular item around here, and I've basically come to the conclusion that I simply don't have time to fight each fire, with each person that doesn't agree with me.

That's what this world is about, learning how to get along, and sharing viewpoints. Unfortunately, some just aren't very good at it.

Only time will tell if our updates and changes on the site will make any affect on our traffic, and SERPs. Such is life.

[idansh]

I wonder why CSS is so important, is it a must ahve for SEO ?

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by idansh

I wonder why CSS is so important, is it a must ahve for SEO ?

CSS enables the search engine spiders to access and crawl your web site with greater ease and thoroughness. I already experienced on my clients sites that this change alone make some positive ranking improvements.

[kgun]

CSS is first and foremost used to style content. Like HTML is a subset of XML, in a sense we can say that CSS is more restrictive than XSLT that is the styling used in XML, even if CSS can also be used to style XML documents.

The original HTML model was wrong from the very beginning where content was mixed with presentation. By using CSS and / or XSLT you separate content from presentation and in that way make the life easier for the SE Bots. Ideally, it should not have any effect on ranking.

Examples:

• Hit second linnk in my signature and view (page) source and you will see how a SE Bot sees the markup. You should be able to find the related stylesheet from that source, namely: http://www.kjellbleivik.com/stylesheets/index.css
• Professional links collected since 1995. It may take a long time to load that document if you are on a slow connection. Not that this is a styled XML document. Again you should be able to see the style sheet by viewing page source: http://www.browsetoolbar.com/favorez/op_xbel2html.xsl
  
  Note alos that an XML stylesheet is by itself an XML document. That is why you get the following message if you clik on the above link in the last vewrsion of Firefox:
  
  
  "This XML file does not appear to have any style information associated with it. The document tree is shown below"
  
  You did not get that message when you clicked on the Professional links collected since 1995. since it has a style sheet.
  
  The SE Bot will only see the same markup that you see when you view the (page) source.

[Webnauts]

Very informative post Kgun.

But I still think it can have an effect on ranking.