Page 2 - Could Use Help/Input with New Article on Ranking Factors

I'm not saying you are wrong. In fact, it makes sense. I am saying that my small site is killing a lot of big (10K+) sites. These are competitive KWs and secondary terms.

I've got 2 serrious competitors. Both do have bigger sites than me, but they both have a lot more BLs too. We go back & forth but they are usually on top for some KWs and we are for others.

Past the top 3 is a ton of sites, many with many times the amount of pages my site has (48 pages *I think*). Page count is a factor, but not over quality content.

Jammer - Thanks for your contributions. I believe we have every one of those listed now. Some are not listed separately, but are under other items, such as Flash, etc. under accessibility.

Under Detrimental Ranking Factors you may want to specifically mention that gambling and alcohol are prohibited in G. I also don't see mention of doorway/landing pages.

I don't see load speed anywhere. That should probably be under URL, Technical, Hosting & Server Side Factors but could be an on-page factor.

And since you thought you were done, I'll mention devalued practices like the title attribute.

Man this thing is so friggin' AWSOME!

randfish,

Thank you so much for this collection of wisdom. It is truly the best article I read so far. I will study it more deeply, believe you me.

After this study I might have to revise my SEO guide over at DP

I've made some more changes and I'm now opting to get help. I've requested about a dozen of the best SEOs I know to review it, vote their importance on each factor, and add their comments. I'm going to take this added input and re-figure the rankings of the factors and add commentary where valuable.

Hopefully, this will help to make it more than just one man's opinion and a better resource overall.

I'll post back here when it's finished - could be 2-3 days.

Rand - I saw you mentioned "minor updates" care to clue us in on what they wre so we don't have to read it through again?

Thanks!

Just some missing content in the non-commented version and the new printable version in MS Word.

Which is *wonderful*.

What missing content? You are making it sound like no big deal but you bothered to post about it. I just want to make sure I'm not missing something cool in my effort to save time.

BTW congrats on the PR7. Too bad it doesn't mean anything, but it is still groovy!

Rand - A PDF version of the article would be much appreciated. Thanks!

PR7 - Yeah, hilarious, right? Amazing that it doesn't pass through the site... That metric seems more and more inaccurate with every update.

The changes made, specifically, were the addition of about 7 factors that had mistakenly been hidden in the non-commented version due to the hiding of the comments themselves. The only other updates are links pointing to the right places and the printable version. Really - it's not much to write about, I was posting to tout the new printable version - which I really need to link to in the article itself.

As for PDFs - I won't touch 'em. Sorry sufyaaan - you'll have to suffer with Word!

Too bad it didn't run through yor site, but mine is at PR4 and I can only figure it's from your link because I haven't done anything with that one in a long time and I don't see any other BLs of consequence. In fact, if I could persude you to repoint that to my new site, that would be cool. Since Hurricane Rita took out the data center MKTG was on I've just worked on 14thC. I think MKTG is going the way of the dod soon...

What's your hang-up with PDFs? It's fun, easy, *everyone* can read them (including G) and if you already have it as a .doc it's a simple matter of exporting it. Just currious.

I do think offering a prin version is a great idea.

Time to go the CSS road Randfish? Then all your pages could be printer friendly.

Mano - True enough. When I have time, CSS at SEOmoz will be on the list.