Page 5 - GaryTheScubaGuy's Top 12 SEO Tips for 2008

Here's a great example: So the Meta Description Saved the day for what you search for... a GREAT POINT!

What about all those longtail terms - surely she has some?

That said:

I would think:

1. the cut-up graphic is a huge issue for a SEO

2. lack of content is a huge issue for a SEO

3. and not ranking well is a huge issue for a SEO.

4. and I sure hope they don't have any text-based readers out there

Are greater issues than whether you found a Meta Tag saving the day.

Seriosuly I would, turn the image into CSS div background and get those amazing attractive absolutely earth shattering discription as div text, or used the image as rollover affect for background text - either way is a 1000% better for visitors and doesn't limit you to JUST a Meta Description.

Let's say this is a Dell style page and the term being searchers for isn't in your Meta [or no where on the poge -- the same argument you provided me] - what appears?

...given the constraints of your original post... a BIG NOTHING"! RIGHT? What then?

It hard to control link anchors from different websites to say "only what you want them to say"...

A superb Meta doesn't solve any page issues - it only makes you think you don't have any... as you pointed out:



The Meta Description isn't weighty for ranks - so we can assume ranks [at whatever depth] were created by links or domain weight... as such in your view - non-Meta descriptions are likely out there as well - even if you don't search for them... surely "fixing the page issues" are better than pretending a Meta Tag will save her all the time and producing "more traffic".



...well the word "beneficial" is open to interpretation... what isn't open to intrepretation is 'your tip conclusion'



The "stand-out" part is also available in snippets... so the "increase conversions" isn't really accurate... is it?

In the end - I'm not asking for a "debate" I'm asking for the data that you "ABSOLUTELY BELIEVE IN" so I can to.

Even though the meta description discussion should really be moved to another thread:

A page without content but with a meta description is exactly the situation that fathom warns us about: A person can be tempted to happily leave the site as it is because the google snippet looks nice, whereas adding real content would be BIG step ahead towards good rankings.

Having perfect copy that contains suitable text snippets for each keyword phrase that a page should show up for is very good and preferable over just a meta description. The questions IMHO are:
- Is it always better from the cost/benefit point of view to write perfect copy rather than writing a good meta description and using good copy?
- If you have perfect copy, is it still useful to write a meta description or will it never show up?
- Does a meta description have its use for those search terms that a page was not intended to rank for and therefore does not contain suitable content for?

Gary and Fathom,

a small example of what Fathom means:

1. query:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=seo

Search engine optimization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Search engine optimization (SEO) is the process of improving the volume and quality of traffic to a web site from search engines via "natural" ("organic" or ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_engine_optimization - 88k - Cached - Similar pages

2. query
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=seo+history

Search engine optimization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Search engine optimization (SEO) is the process of improving the volume and quality of traffic to a web site ... 1 History; 2 Webmasters and search engines ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_engine_optimization - 88k - Cached - Similar pages

Conclusion:
Both queries have the same Wikipedia page as a result. No Meta Description.
The first query highlights "SEO" in the snippet but you won't find the word "history" in it.
The second snippet highlights the word "SEO" and "history" as it matches the query.

Gary, if you would setup a page about SEO now and use the first results snippet as your description; somebody searches for "SEO history" the word history would not be highlighted in your snippet in the SERPs thus convert worse, after your statement.

Google takes the best fitting snippet matching the query.
Search for "SEO Black Hat" 4th position, Wikipedia, same page, "SEO" + "Black Hat" highlighted - convert better than your page with meta description.
SEO + White Hat
SEO + Organizations
and so on...

I think this is what Fathom means and is praying all the time in the forums. Snippets are nowadays created by Google (I left others out for now) matching the query, not you have to create your Meta description matching the possible queries. This all additionally is a good reason to create a lot of content, a big article as Google has more text/words to create that snippet out of.

Else, Gary you know that I really appreciate your work, efford and your way of sharing information. All your articles, 101s and so on are authorities for me but in the point of the meta description I disagree.

Listen Gary I'm not asking much here... I realize there are studies all over the place commenting on "not exactly on what this Meta thing is about... and not really saying CTR improves when you use a Meta.

Your beliefs weren't built on them... anyway.

You can delete all my posts and all posts they spawn -- as pointed out by someone this discussion has been repeated a dozen time a month and every year since SEOChat started in 2003... and in every single case - my stance hadn't changed - and everytime those lesser in ability add their 2 cents and regurgiate the SEO company line... "I use them - so you should" you'll get more/better traffic...

People believe and inherently trust what you write... It must be true - Gary wrote it...

I guess if everyone's happy with that - so am I.

Good-bye!

I myself do not really use an xml sitemap. I perfer to be able to see what pages are naturally indexed rather then giving google a big list of my urls so when you do site: etc or check in webmaster tools it will show them.

Being able to see which pages are not getting indexed or "noticed" rather is IMO the best way to go about making a website. It would be far better to be able to say "the webpage i want ranking isnt ranking" and know from doing the site: op. that it isnt even indexed.

You then know the reason for the page not ranking, instead of going through every possible sinario because you added it to the google sitemap already.

Get google to go to your website because it wants to, dont give them a whole list of all your webpages so they can be "lazy" as it were and find them all at once.

LOL! people agree with you too mate, what i would say to people is to view both arguments with an open mind and then decide which would best suit you. i have tried and tested both with similar results so i use a mixture depending on the page and the amount of content we have on that page.

I would actual point out that google webmaster tools has got a section where it shows you how many missing meta descriptions and titles there are or if they are duplicate. Would this not be a sign that they want people to use these more?

(sorry about throwing that out there gary and fathom, i just wouldnt mind your views on that.)

I don't remember asking for tips on how to improve her site.

You asked for proof Fathom, so I spent some time trying to find you some. Many here listen to you as well. I appreciate a constructive argument where we can compare theories, and no one ever said everyone knows everything, but I keep things a little lighter than you. Rather than insultingly criticising my theory as wrong and yours as right, take away what you want.

At the end of the day, most member shere are between novice and professional. If there is ONE SINGLE SOLITARY BENEFIT to meta descriptions its worth doing. If there is any negative aspects to doing anything I say, if I did still write them I would mention the negatives as well.

This post was meant to share some good information to every level rather than just a novice or just an expert. Metas are very minimal when it comes to my task list when I optimise a site, but like I have always said, if it doesn't hurt...

So lets move on to the next one which isn't new information, but I'm sure many here have yet to try it.

I use sitemaps more for getting changes seen and pushed out quicker.

For instance if I had a client that had duplicate content issues (titles, on-page, etc.). After they were corrected I would rerun a new sitemap and manually submit it through WC's xml submission tool.

I think anytime I have made significant changes to a site (navigation, pumping up linkjuice or anything related I rerun and resubmit.

GaryTheScubaGuy

10. Use social bookmarking websites for short-term ranking boost and blogs/forums to establish long term trust and authority

I had a versin of this in my 2007 version of the top 21 tips but I have expanded this to cover a little more, and since its still working like a charm I've decided to add it again.

Social Bookmarking - Wikipedia defines it: In a social bookmarking system, users store lists of Internet resources that they find useful. These lists are either accessible to the public or a specific network, and other people with similar interests can view the links by category, tags, or even randomly. Most social bookmarking services allow users to search for bookmarks which are associated with given "tags", and rank the resources by the number of users which have bookmarked them. Many social bookmarking services also have implemented algorithms to draw inferences from the tag keywords that are assigned to resources by examining the clustering of particular keywords, and the relation of keywords to one another.

I defines it this way:
One of the best free ways to get increased ranking, back links and traffic, for very little time commitment other than setup.
This very moment most search engine algorithms are placing a ton of weight on end-user 'bookmarking', 'tagging' or one of various types of end-user generated highlighting.

Before doing any of this run a rank report to track your progress. I have tested this on terms showing on page one, on terms ranked 11th through 12th and others buried around pages 5-10. It works on them all in different time frames, and they last for different periods of time. This you will need to test yourself. Be careful because you don't want to be identified as a spammer. Be sure to use genuine content that provides a benefit to the user.

Here is how I recommend using social bookmarking;
1. Download this; Roboform. (It says it will limit you but I've had as many as 30+ passwords created and stored in the trial version) This will allow you to quickly fill out signup forms and store passwords for the 10 Bookmark sites that I am going to be sending you to.

2. Within Roboform go to the custom area and put a username and password in, as well as your other information that sites usually ask for to register. This way when you are using these different bookmarks it's a 1-click login in and becomes a relatively quick and painless procedure.

3. Establish accounts with these Social Bookmark Sites;
a. Digg
b. Technorati
c. Del.icio.us
d. NowPublic
e. StumbleUpon
f. BlinkList
g. Spurl
h. Furl
i. Slashdot
j. Simpy
k. Google Toolbar (w/Google Bookmarking)

Here is a list of social sites that are not using the nofollow attribute (for those of you that still think this eliminates the link, rather than the trust the publisher passes on) along with the PR next to it.

1. Blinklist (7)
2. Furl (7)
3. Backflip (6)
4. Bibsonomy (6)
5. LinkaGoGo (6)
6. Mister-Wong (6)
7. Raw Sugar (6)
8. Spurl (6)
9. Buddy Marks (5)
10. Jumptags (5)
11. MyJeeves / Ask (5)
12. MyLinkVault (5)
13. Xilnus (5)
14. A1 Webmarks (4)
15. Bookmark Tracker (4)
16. Connectedy (4)
17. Diigo (4)
18. OYAX (4)
19. MyVmarks (4)
20. TeDigo (4)
21. ez4u (3)
22. MyPIP (3)
23. SyncOne (3)
24. Yattle (2)


You can also use this handy tool: http://[remove this]www.wibbly.net/dofollow-search.html

4. Internet Explorer, Firefox and most other browsers have an "add a tab" option, but I use Firefox because I can bookmark the login pages in one file, then "open all tabs" in one click. From here I click on each tab and in most cases, if you set it up right, Roboform will have already logged you in. Otherwise you're on the login page and by clicking on the Roboform button everything is prefilled, all you need to do is click submit. (some of the bookmark sites will allow you to add their button into your browser bar, or you can get an extension from Firefox like the Digg Add-on to make things quicker)

5. Lastly, Install the Google Toolbar. It has a bookmark function as well, and you can import all your bookmarks from Firefox directly into it. Google looks at many different things when assigning rank and trust. For instance, when you search for something and go into a website, Google will remember how long you stayed, how deep you went, and if you came back out into the search to select another site, which means you didn't find what you were looking for. This is all part of the Privacy Issues tha