Is Onsite SEO Dying Down?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by kgun

May be a natural place to start is here: Creating a Science of the Web | Web Science Research Initiative


We can talk of

1. Sematics generally. Sematic that is meaningful content.
2. Semantic linking. That is meaningful and relevant linking.
3. Semantic markup. That is meaningful markup.

Semantics, pragmatics etc. is a large subject in information science fare more complex than any Wikipedia article.

I agree there are a lot of different types of semantics. But starting a debate about a semantically structured websites losing that debate and then saying, wait no I was talking about CSS.

I just feel that is going out on a limb. Or rather he was trying to baffle me with big words rather than try and prove his point. Kind of sad.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

I agree there are a lot of different types of semantics. But starting a debate about a semantically structured websites losing that debate and then saying, wait no I was talking about CSS.

I just feel that is going out on a limb. Or rather he was trying to baffle me with big words rather than try and prove his point. Kind of sad.

OK Janeth. I did not want to be rude, but I think you are asking for that now.
Just to make things clear here, the thema semantics, not semantical structure alone have began where you said that microformats have nothing to do with Semantics.

You have absolutely no idea what is the difference between the terms Semantics, Semantic Web and Semantical Structure. I can understand your problem, because you have absolutely no idea how Computers and Software are created and work.

If you knew those basics, the discussion would have not ended where it did already.

Therefore, I have no time trying to explain novice what all that is, and especially when that novice is not interested and claiming to be an expert.

End of story.

[SEO]

Originally Posted by janeth

Let me try and explain my understanding of the whole thing.

1. Semantics is the study of the relationship between words and meanings. A lot of people feel the search engines are heading this way. If so then they would be able to better understand what your site is about as well as know if you are sticking words into your text for nothing other than ranking.

2. Semantically structured is nothing more than the old W3C thing with a new twist.

3. And last but not least is microformats. A page does not have to be semantically structured to use microformating.

And I do not mean to come off rude but it seems that when the onsite SEO guys lost the argument about a site needing to be W3C compliant to rank, they just renamed it and kept on going.

And I am not saying that a site being semantically structured or text being semantically written want help it rank. But when a guy who claims to be an SEO points to the word "home" and claims the site is ranking there because it is properly semantically structured I really have to wonder.

The ranking boost you would get for a semantically structured site is not going to be that much and nothing noticeable on a competitive keyword.

That’s my two cents on all the big words.

There was a discussion about this a year or 2 ago.
NASA was ranking No.1 in Google for the keyword 'home'...
Many of the world's SEO experts, while toying with the question "what makes a website rank?" (as an SEO is prone to do) came to the conclusion that the major contributing factors were Onpage. apparently having a PR10 will cause you to rank very high for any keyword that is on your page. Try typing "Image of the Day" or "multimedia" or "Interactive Features" into Google. NASA is nearly always amongst the top ranked websites for for keywords on it's homepage. That fact is not because they have links pointing to them with those specific keywords.

With regard to semantics...
Semantics is not purely linguistics (although that is the most popular interpretation).
Semantics is also philosophical.
Have a look at some of the Google patents.
Google has patents involving algorithms that measure how long people stay at your website, what they do while they are there, how many pages they look at on your website, where they go when they leave your website, how they leave your website...

As far as Google is concerned (and other search engines) there is evidence that they are trying to divert from linguistic semantics and make use of 'relationship semantics" (or philosophical/logical semantics) and reactional behavioral semantics.


Read:
Semantic Web Patterns: A Guide to Semantic Technologies - ReadWriteWeb
Chief Marketing Technologist by Scott Brinker: SEO + Semantic Web = SEO++

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by SEO

There was a discussion about this a year or 2 ago.
NASA was ranking No.1 in Google for the keyword 'home'...
Many of the world's SEO experts, while toying with the question "what makes a website rank?" (as an SEO is prone to do) came to the conclusion that the major contributing factors were Onpage. apparently having a PR10 will cause you to rank very high for any keyword that is on your page. Try typing "Image of the Day" or "multimedia" or "Interactive Features" into Google. NASA is nearly always amongst the top ranked websites for for keywords on it's homepage. That fact is not because they have links pointing to them with those specific keywords.

With regard to semantics...
Semantics is not purely linguistic.
Semantics is also philosophical.
Have a look at some of the Google patents.
Google has patents involving algorithms that measure how long people stay at your website, what they do while they are there, how many pages they look at on your website, where they go when they leave your website, how they leave your website...

As far as Google is concerned (and other search engines) there is evidence that they are trying to divert from linguistic semantics and make use of 'relationship semantics" (or philosophical/logical semantics) and reactional behavioral semantics.


Read:
Semantic Web Patterns: A Guide to Semantic Technologies - ReadWriteWeb
Chief Marketing Technologist by Scott Brinker: SEO + Semantic Web = SEO++

Thank you SEO for the wonderful post! You got s Rep Point for it.

[Peter (IMC)]

day 5 and in position 18 while starting at 6?

Age algorithms come to mind though I don't know what was done of course.

On the other hand:

#1 inanchor:"custom website designs" - Google Search
#1 allintitle:custom website designs - Google Search
#1 intext:"custom website designs" - Google Search
#1 "custom website designs" - Google Search

So why not #1 for custom website designs - Google Search?

Maybe some Onsite SEO is the answer?

Added: I see you did some things already. But Google hasn't indexed it yet. Let's see what happens. This is a good test case to get some new information from.

[SEO]

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

day 5 and in position 18 while starting at 6?

Age algorithms come to mind though I don't know what was done of course.

On the other hand:

#1 inanchor:"custom website designs" - Google Search
#1 allintitle:custom website designs - Google Search
#1 intext:"custom website designs" - Google Search
#1 "custom website designs" - Google Search

So why not #1 for custom website designs - Google Search?

Maybe some Onsite SEO is the answer?

Added: I see you did some things already. But Google hasn't indexed it yet. Let's see what happens. This is a good test case to get some new information from.

I would be modifying that title tag a little... (I couldn't find a whistling icon)

[jabo]

who have been doing SEO for years now? how was it say like 5 to 8 years ago?

[kgun]

Originally Posted by jabo

who have been doing SEO for years now? how was it say like 5 to 8 years ago?

About meta tags mostly and some IBL's especially as Google grew stronger and stronger.

[Terry Van Horne]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

So Eric Enge doesn't know what he is talking about either? Cascading Style Sheets (CSS) and SEO

Eric is a smart guy but the CSS stuff is a crock! As is clean code results in higher ranking. I used to code by hand and validate. Stopped and there was no change at all in the rankings! If it helps it definitely doesn't come under "sustainable competitive advantage" which is what real marketers seek! Those who stoop to selling perceptions and what they do are the ones who see it as a competitive advantage! As to using CSS, I was bringing content to the top using tables in 96 and continue to do it today. CSS is wonky technology that has never worked as expected. All it does is waste time and pad design bills! It's great for formatting display the rest is iffy at best and using it for positioning is and always will be an exercise that causes a lot of frustration!

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

OK Janeth. I did not want to be rude, but I think you are asking for that now.
Just to make things clear here, the thema semantics, not semantical structure alone have began where you said that microformats have nothing to do with Semantics.

You have absolutely no idea what is the difference between the terms Semantics, Semantic Web and Semantical Structure. I can understand your problem, because you have absolutely no idea how Computers and Software are created and work.

If you knew those basics, the discussion would have not ended where it did already.

Therefore, I have no time trying to explain novice what all that is, and especially when that novice is not interested and claiming to be an expert.

End of story.

I know more than you. I know for darn sure that Semantics and CSS are two different things.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

day 5 and in position 18 while starting at 6?

Age algorithms come to mind though I don't know what was done of course.

On the other hand:

#1 inanchor:"custom website designs" - Google Search
#1 allintitle:custom website designs - Google Search
#1 intext:"custom website designs" - Google Search
#1 "custom website designs" - Google Search

So why not #1 for custom website designs - Google Search?

Maybe some Onsite SEO is the answer?

Added: I see you did some things already. But Google hasn't indexed it yet. Let's see what happens. This is a good test case to get some new information from.

It actually started at the bottom of page two and went to #6 but with all the changes that have been made it would be hard to say for sure which one makes it move. But I can promise you I will make it move.

[Terry Van Horne]

Originally Posted by jabo

who have been doing SEO for years now? how was it say like 5 to 8 years ago?

Been a webmaster since 93 and wrote some of the first SEO articles. Meta data was more important but good SEOs were way beyond just that. Meta data was dead before 2000. IBL's never were anything until Google came along. WebCrawler used links but not to the extent Google does so they really weren't worth manipulating before G came along.

Back in those days it was mostly about optimizing hidden tags like img alt, keyword research the long tail has got a lot of attention lately but it was a big part of the job in the early days too. We also stressed the KW location in tags much more back then as well. To this day I still use the same formula for the opening and closing paragraphs and important tags like <Title>. The reason for that is the legacy algos still seem to be in place and the location of KW in those elements still seems very important details most SEOs don't understand. It is often discussed as being about KW density but... IMO, it's more about location in relatrion to the beginning end of the HTML element. KW density was also a crock... but don't get me started on that

My site back then was a major SEO reference
Search Engine Optimization Blog : SEO News archives and SEM industry posts
if you take the liink in the left margin marked archive and go to the SE part you'll see where I outlined the algo for most majors.
Search Engine Secrets Positions Tuorials:Improve search engine placements

Just an aside here. I do things now in pretty much the same way as I did in 2000. The algos changing is a myth. If you don't go outside of what is in your direct control then... algos changes will only affect you positively because they remove the "exploiters" to make way for truly relevant sites.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by SEO

There was a discussion about this a year or 2 ago.
NASA was ranking No.1 in Google for the keyword 'home'...
Many of the world's SEO experts, while toying with the question "what makes a website rank?" (as an SEO is prone to do) came to the conclusion that the major contributing factors were Onpage. apparently having a PR10 will cause you to rank very high for any keyword that is on your page.

And A pr10 would come from off site SEO. Good thing webnuts did not know that, otherwise he might not have given you the rep.

[Peter (IMC)]

Originally Posted by SEO

There was a discussion about this a year or 2 ago.
NASA was ranking No.1 in Google for the keyword 'home'...
Many of the world's SEO experts, while toying with the question "what makes a website rank?" (as an SEO is prone to do) came to the conclusion that the major contributing factors were Onpage. apparently having a PR10 will cause you to rank very high for any keyword that is on your page. Try typing "Image of the Day" or "multimedia" or "Interactive Features" into Google. NASA is nearly always amongst the top ranked websites for for keywords on it's homepage. That fact is not because they have links pointing to them with those specific keywords.

Are you sure? NASA - Home (Google Cache)
"These terms only appear in links pointing to this page: home "

Originally Posted by SEO

With regard to semantics...
Semantics is not purely linguistics (although that is the most popular interpretation).
Semantics is also philosophical.
Have a look at some of the Google patents.
Google has patents involving algorithms that measure how long people stay at your website, what they do while they are there, how many pages they look at on your website, where they go when they leave your website, how they leave your website...

They are measuring all those things, but I believe that's more related to the data they get from Analytics. They can't use that data directly in the search algorithms, but what they can do is determine relationships between website design, structure, etc. and visitor behaviour. Then use that data in the ranking algorithms.

Originally Posted by SEO

As far as Google is concerned (and other search engines) there is evidence that they are trying to divert from linguistic semantics and make use of 'relationship semantics" (or philosophical/logical semantics) and reactional behavioral semantics.

But never directly because they don't have all data from all sites.

[Terry Van Horne]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Therefore, I have no time trying to explain novice what all that is, and especially when that novice is not interested and claiming to be an expert.

End of story.

The second time you have dismissed Janeth and said you're leaving, do you ever follow through on what you post? You bring nothing to this but $3 dictionary words that are totally useless in SEO implementation.

IMO, this research is all done by people that don't have clue one about optimizing sites with 10's of 0000's of pages or competitive keywords or they wouldn't be wasting their time on "semantics". Basically you're bringing a knife to a gun fight or you're the one legged man in an a$$e kickin' competition!

[monfis]

Originally Posted by Faglork

Hi all,

in all this talk about content and search engines no one seems to care about those who "do the work" - the visitors. Search engines can only *react* to the input of the users. So, even for small sites, it is important to know what your prospective visitors are *really* looking for. This only *seems* to be obvious - I had many cases where the term people searched for was way off from what my clients were thinking that it must be THE search term in their business.

So, for example, it pays to rent access to a good (!) keyword database and check your content against actual search phrases - not against hypothetical search phrases.

For me, SEO is about microcontent - can I re-phrase sentences and headlines in a manner that the content *gains* value AND contains all/most of the "buzzwords"? This requires a lot of work, but the results are very good.

Just my 2 cents ...

That's exactly my everyday experience with client pages; and talking about links: Quite a while ago I was contacted by a Company that faced problems with their Google rankings. They performed well on Yahoo and MSN but had been almost invisible on Google. (Site about 2000 pages and 1800 inbound links) Three months of onpage/site SEO work gained almost 100 # 1s and about the same amount of top ten positions. As I said before, not a single event - everydays work.

So I came to the conclusion, onpage/site SEO is still very important and will be for a while to come.

[SEO]

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

Are you sure? NASA - Home (Google Cache)
"These terms only appear in links pointing to this page: home "

Using SEO Elite I found that approx 3.3% of nasa's inbound links from approx. 1200 domains linking to it have the word home in the anchor text.

That is approx 40 links.

40 links with the search term 'home' isn't enough to make a page rank for the keyword 'home' outranking 7,360,000,000 other pages.

The assumption was... that being a PR10 and having the word 'home' in the title and interior links was enough to make it rank no.1 for home... beating out numerous other sites like "homedepot".

How many links do you think would point to the NASA homepage with the anchor text "Image of the Day" or "multimedia" or "Interactive Features". NASA is on page 1 for all of them.

I would have thought the search term "multimedia" would be fairly competitive. 458,000,000 results, many thousands targeting that particular term, positions 1 & 2 are both PR7 and targeting "multimedia" as a keyword - and NASA ranks No.3. Using SEO Elite I could not find 1 external backlink out of more than 1200 backlinks to the NASA homepage with the keyword "multimedia" in it.

Also... The interior pages of the NASA website have 'breadcrumbs' links back to the homepage with the anchor text "NASA Home". A couple of hundred of them would on PR* pages would also weigh in pretty heavily.

So the theory is that a site with authority as high as PR10 can rank for pretty much whatever it wants simply because of its onpage attributes

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

They are measuring all those things, but I believe that's more related to the data they get from Analytics. They can't use that data directly in the search algorithms, but what they can do is determine relationships between website design, structure, etc. and visitor behaviour. Then use that data in the ranking algorithms.

But never directly because they don't have all data from all sites.

From the time you type a search term into Google they are measuring and analyzing your responses. Apparently... having a title and description that causes a higher clickthrough rate for your organic listing can lift you higher in the results.

And yes... they are analyzing how long people stay at your website, what they do while they are there, how many pages they look at on your website, where they go when they leave your website, how they leave your website...


You have the Google Toolbar installed don't you...???

Do you think the Google Toolbar was developed so that webmasters could have a pretty green line to measure a websites importance...?

The Google Toolbar was developed for the very purpose of transmitting analytical data about your browsing habits straight back Google in real time. If they wanted to they could tell you exactly how much time you spent on this website last week, where you came from, what you did while you were here and where you went to when you left (and more).

Read the Google Toolbar privacy policy:
"Any time you use the Google Toolbar to contact Google, such as by sending a search query to Google, the Toolbar sends standard, limited information including your machine’s IP address and one or more cookies. This data is retained in Google's server logs and protected according to our general Privacy Policy."
Toolbar for Internet Explorer Help Center

That is basically all Google does... They collect, analyze and redistribute data.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by SEO

The assumption was... that being a PR10 and having the word 'home' in the title and interior links was enough to make it rank no.1 for home... beating out numerous other sites like "homedepot".

I agree but it is due to links, linking to the site.

[Peter (IMC)]

Originally Posted by SEO

How many links do you think would point to the NASA homepage with the anchor text "Image of the Day" or "multimedia" or "Interactive Features". NASA is on page 1 for all of them.

allinanchor:Image of the Day - Google Search
allinanchor:multimedia - Google Search
allinanchor:Interactive Features - Google Search

The words in the anchors exist, otherwise they wouldn't show up for those inanchor searches.

By the way,.. NASA is on page one for all those frases, but the NASA homepage is NOT .

Originally Posted by SEO

I would have thought the search term "multimedia" would be fairly competitive. 458,000,000 results, many thousands targeting that particular term, positions 1 & 2 are both PR7 and targeting "multimedia" as a keyword - and NASA ranks No.3. Using SEO Elite I could not find 1 external backlink out of more than 1200 backlinks to the NASA homepage with the keyword "multimedia" in it.

Again,.. the NASA homepage is not ranking for the keyword multimedia. It's www.nasa.gov/multimedia/index.html

Originally Posted by SEO

Also... The interior pages of the NASA website have 'breadcrumbs' links back to the homepage with the anchor text "NASA Home". A couple of hundred of them would on PR* pages would also weigh in pretty heavily.

So the theory is that a site with authority as high as PR10 can rank for pretty much whatever it wants simply because of its onpage attributes

OnSITE atributes. The internal links with anchor texts are needed.

Originally Posted by SEO

From the time you type a search term into Google they are measuring and analyzing your responses. Apparently... having a title and description that causes a higher clickthrough rate for your organic listing can lift you higher in the results.

And yes... they are analyzing how long people stay at your website, what they do while they are there, how many pages they look at on your website, where they go when they leave your website, how they leave your website...


You have the Google Toolbar installed don't you...???

Do you think the Google Toolbar was developed so that webmasters could have a pretty green line to measure a websites importance...?

The Google Toolbar was developed for the very purpose of transmitting analytical data about your browsing habits straight back Google in real time. If they wanted to they could tell you exactly how much time you spent on this website last week, where you came from, what you did while you were here and where you went to when you left (and more).

Read the Google Toolbar privacy policy:
"Any time you use the Google Toolbar to contact Google, such as by sending a search query to Google, the Toolbar sends standard, limited information including your machine’s IP address and one or more cookies. This data is retained in Google's server logs and protected according to our general Privacy Policy."
Toolbar for Internet Explorer Help Center

That is basically all Google does... They collect, analyze and redistribute data.

Don't be rediculous. Not everybody has the Google toolbar installed, so they still don't have all data of all sites. They don't use the collected data directly. They analise the collected data to improve their algorithms. It's not the same thing as saying: "This site will rank higher because people stay longer in this site."

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

And A pr10 would come from off site SEO. Good thing webnuts did not know that, otherwise he might not have given you the rep.

Cool down Janeth. Did I ever mention that off-page optimization is not important?

Unfortunately on-page is getting more important than ever before: Matt Cutts and Eric Enge Discuss Link Building

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

I know more than you. I know for darn sure that Semantics and CSS are two different things.

I understand... Semantic CSS | Semantic HTML

And the answer about all we discussed and disagreed above, have a look at this 47 pages slideshow Semantic Web Data Integration with hCalendar and GRDDL), and if there are any further questions, please feel free to post them.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Cool down Janeth. Did I ever mention that off-page optimization is not important?

Unfortunately on-page is getting more important than ever before: Matt Cutts and Eric Enge Discuss Link Building

I am not hot but would ask for more proof than an article.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

I understand... Semantic CSS | Semantic HTML

And the answer about all we discussed and disagreed above, have a look at this 47 pages slideshow Semantic Web Data Integration with hCalendar and GRDDL), and if there are any further questions, please feel free to post them.

I am not going to waste my time with a bunch of stupid links from you. It has been said over and over that it has nothing to do with ranking. But then you just can not accept that because you sell it to your clients.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

I am not going to waste my time with a bunch of stupid links from you. It has been said over and over that it has nothing to do with ranking. But then you just can not accept that because you sell it to your clients.

Which of the following has more weight when it comes to rankings?

1. <h1>Holiday Resort Reservations</h1>

or

2. <p><font size="1">Holiday Resort Reservations</font></p>

or

3. none

Just tell a number. 1, 2 or 3. OK?

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

But then you just can not accept that because you sell it to your clients.

Are you attempting to offend me and my business Janeth? Let's stay civilized here please.

Thanks.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

I am not going to waste my time with a bunch of stupid links from you.

Stupid links? A link to W3C? Take it easy Janeth.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Are you attempting to offend me and my business Janeth? Let's stay civilized here please.

Thanks.

You crossed that line a couple post back.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Stupid links? A link to W3C? Take it easy Janeth.

I am not going to waste my time reading about something that has no affect on how my site ranks or performs.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

You crossed that line a couple post back.

Did I? I did not realize that. My apologies. Lets stop it right here. OK?

Now back to topic. Can you answer my above question now?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Which of the following has more weight when it comes to rankings?

1. <h1>Holiday Resort Reservations</h1>

or

2. <p><font size="1">Holiday Resort Reservations</font></p>

or

3. none

Just tell a number. 1, 2 or 3. OK?

Now that is sad. You sell your services to clients and then come to an SEO forum and ask for help on simple things like this.

You really should learn this stuff before starting an SEO business.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

I am not going to waste my time reading about something that has no affect on how my site ranks or performs.

How your web site performs must be relevant to everyone. Or did I miss something?

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

Now that is sad. You sell your services to clients and then come to an SEO forum and ask for help on simple things like this.

You really should learn this stuff before starting an SEO business.

I asked for help? You are getting seriously ridiculous.

Janeth you are offending me and misleading the public about my SEO practices and business processes.
Or you stay on topic and stop misbehaving or acting silly.

You said semantics has nothing to do with rankings. And I asked you to choose a damn number.

Again:

1?

2?

or

3?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

How your web site performs must be relevant to everyone. Or did I miss something?

Only to the people buying from me.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Janeth you are offending me and misleading the public about my SEO practices and business processes.
Or you stay on topic and stop misbehaving or acting silly.

You said semantics has nothing to do with rankings. And I asked you to choose a damn number.

Again:

1?

2?

or

3?

lol

And if I don't?

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

On site SEO has nothing, nothing to do with the site getting crawled or with PageRank.

Crawl Ratio depends on on-site and off-site SEO.

For example:

On-site SEO: Implementation of HTTP-IF-MODIFIED

Off-page SEO: Page Rank. Sites with low crawl, have lower crawl ratio.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

lol

And if I don't?

Sorry for missing your answer in your previous post: Is Onsite SEO Dying Down?

So your answer is obviously number 3.

No further questions your honor. I'll leave the jury here to make up their minds.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Sorry for missing your answer in your previous post: Is Onsite SEO Dying Down?

So your answer is obviously number 3.

No further questions your honor. I'll leave the jury here to make up their minds.

It seems you are wanting me to give you information so you can better serve your clients. And it is nothing personal but I have a problem with people selling a service that they know nothing about.

[Peter (IMC)]

oh come on you 2. Stop behaving like kids that want the last candy.

[espmartin]

Great discussion here (as long as we all don't take anything personal...).

#1:

Originally Posted by Terry Van Horne

I used to code by hand and validate. Stopped and there was no change at all in the rankings!

Valid, semantic markup is needed on the web. Accessibility (ouch! Not a marketable subject I admit!) is the
byproduct of validation/standards/etc... - and it's dependent on it, and that should NEVER be tossed aside just
because you (haven't experienced ) a SERP change.

#2:

Originally Posted by Terry Van Horne

CSS is wonky technology that has never worked as expected. All it does is waste time and pad design bills!

Please take the time to learn your craft (if you are a designer, and NOT just a marketer that is), as CSS can be
written to work "as expected" - Every Time.

#3:

Originally Posted by Terry Van Horne

It's great for formatting display the rest is iffy at best and using it for positioning is and always will be an exercise that causes a lot of frustration!

Again, please take the time to learn your craft (if you are a designer, and NOT just a marketer that is). You see, for
me PHP is a crazy language to write in. But I'm learning it - and just like everything else in life, once you learn PHP,
you CAN become an expert in it... Same for CSS. Learn it, and you'll end up NOT being frustrated because you
know how to use it.

I just had to stick up for CSS in regards to this discussion, as this thread is VERY popular, and we need to educate
the Marketers who dabble in web design on this forum.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

I ranked #1 for that term for many years but not a problem. I'll do it again. Give me 7 days.

About 10 minutes you were ranking in Google in the near of LA, USA #15 for the keyphrase: "Custom Website Designs".

You will become #1? WOW! Can you explain the big deal?

Let me explain:

I made a keywords research with Wordtracker, Keyword Discovery, etc, and I got the following results:

• Wordtracker returns 14 searches per day
• KeywordDiscovery returns 1 search per day, at that one Google
• Google rerturns 18 searches a day
• Yahoo returns: 5 searches a day
• MSN returns 2 searches a day
• AdWords returns low searches volume

Is that a search term where SEO comes into discussion?

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

oh come on you 2. Stop behaving like kids that want the last candy.

May I have a chocolate Peter?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by espmartin

I just had to stick up for CSS in regards to this discussion, as this thread is VERY popular, and we need to educate the Marketers who dabble in web design on this forum.

I agree and I love CSS but I believe Terry was speaking more with SEO than web design. Another words he did not see that big of an affect with the SEO side of CSS.

At least I believe I am correct.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

I agree and I love CSS but I believe Terry was speaking more with SEO than web design. Another words he did not see that big of an affect with the SEO side of CSS.

At least I believe I am correct.

I was reading on your web site:

Originally Posted by http://www.geeksonsteroids.com/getting-the-right-landing-page.php

I do not think it matters which tag you use but I do feel that Google pays a little more attention to text that you’ve made stand out. I also feel that Google pays a little more attention to the first text they come across on the page.

How can you achieve that more efficiently. With tables or without?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

About 10 minutes you were ranking in Google in the near of LA, USA #15 for the keyphrase: "Custom Website Designs".

You will become #1? WOW! Can you explain the big deal?

No big deal. Someone asked me to do it and I am working on doing it.

Originally Posted by Webnauts

Let me explain:

NO, Let me explain, because you seem to be missing the boat here.

Custom website designs is just one word. I am adding another 5,000 pages to the site and each will be targeting a different keyword.

If each keyword brings in one visitor per month then that will be an additional 5,000 visitors per month. Once I add these 5,000 pages I will then add another and another.

At the same time these pages are being added I will be working on getting links from outside sources to link back into each page along with the internal link structure.

Every page will be optimized onsite and offsite and they will rank and they will bring traffic into the site.

That is what I call SEO.

[janeth]

Originally Posted by Webnauts

I was reading on your web site:



How can you achieve that more efficiently. With tables or without?

On a new site I would set it up tabless and move the content to the top of the page. On an old site that was using tables I would see more benefit in adding pages then in changing the current layout.

[deepsand]

Originally Posted by janeth

Now that is sad. You sell your services to clients and then come to an SEO forum and ask for help on simple things like this.

You really should learn this stuff before starting an SEO business.

Impugning another, rather than focusing on factual issues, serves no one well. We all have trouble enough dealing with our own irrational selves, and allowing that internal conflict to spill into a public forum, while commonplace, is most unproductive; it neither facilitates our taming our demons nor engenders receptiveness in others.

Can you and will you kindly state, for the benefit of others here, both the factual issues about which you and webnauts disagree, and the precise nature of such disagreements?

[janeth]

Originally Posted by deepsand

Impugning another, rather than focusing on factual issues, serves no one well. We all have trouble enough dealing with our own irrational selves, and allowing that internal conflict to spill into a public forum, while commonplace, is most unproductive; it neither facilitates our taming our demons nor engenders receptiveness in others.

Can you and will you kindly state, for the benefit of others here, both the factual issues about which you and webnauts disagree, and the precise nature of such disagreements?

This is not the place for that.

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

No big deal. Someone asked me to do it and I am working on doing it.



NO, Let me explain, because you seem to be missing the boat here.

Custom website designs is just one word. I am adding another 5,000 pages to the site and each will be targeting a different keyword.

If each keyword brings in one visitor per month then that will be an additional 5,000 visitors per month. Once I add these 5,000 pages I will then add another and another.

At the same time these pages are being added I will be working on getting links from outside sources to link back into each page along with the internal link structure.

Every page will be optimized onsite and offsite and they will rank and they will bring traffic into the site.

That is what I call SEO.

Am I wrong if I suppose that you will create manually and not automatically doorway pages? Or do you mean 5000 pages which are equally meaningful for searchers?

[Webnauts]

Originally Posted by janeth

This is not the place for that.

If it is not the right place here, where would you propose?

[SEO]

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

allinanchor:Image of the Day - Google Search
allinanchor:multimedia - Google Search
allinanchor:Interactive Features - Google Search

The words in the anchors exist, otherwise they wouldn't show up for those inanchor searches.

By the way,.. NASA is on page one for all those frases, but the NASA homepage is NOT .


Again,.. the NASA homepage is not ranking for the keyword multimedia. It's NASA - NASA Multimedia Page

You're right Peter. My mistake.

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

OnSITE atributes. The internal links with anchor texts are needed.

That was the whole point to my original post about NASA. It is the OnSITE atributes that cause it to rank so highly for that particular word not offpage optimization targeting that word. Or do some people think it is links pointing to the NASA homepage with the anchor text 'home' that cause it to rank so highly for the search term 'home'?

Originally Posted by Peter (IMC)

Don't be rediculous. Not everybody has the Google toolbar installed, so they still don't have all data of all sites. They don't use the collected data directly. They analise the collected data to improve their algorithms. It's not the same thing as saying: "This site will rank higher because people stay longer in this site."

What is rediculous...? You generally only need to survey a segment of the population to get an overall analysis. I didn't say they use the collected data directly. And yes... They analise the collected data to improve their algorithms (which is exactly what I said). How do you think they can measure how long somebody is on a website for...? Or where they came from ...? Or what they clicked on while they were on the site (All attributes included within the Google patents)...?

What do You think the purpose of the Google Toolbar is...?