|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
 |
|||||||||
| |
||
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
|
|||||||||
| |
||
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
|
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Rating: 
|
Display Modes |
SEO Chat Forums Sponsor:
|
|
|
|
#46
January 22nd, 2009, 07:12 PM
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Quote:
I guess my kipper wit is improving! 
__________________
Fathom @ Twitter "We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, therefore, is not an act, but a habit." -- Aristotle
|
|
#47
January 22nd, 2009, 11:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ok fine, if you have done that much research, I’d take your words (unless I came up with a similar research but with different results)
Quote:
More than description, it tells me the insignificance of our targeted terms (i.e. keywords). M glad you stop your research right there, a little more insight would have revealed that almost 90% traffic we get is actually God-sent … Does that mean we should get rid of the obsession known as “Keyword”  and focus more on our over-all theme?
__________________
SEO & SEM Blog says: SEO is a term that daunts those who are not conversant with it and haunts those who are.
|
|
#48
January 23rd, 2009, 05:45 AM
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Quote:
Is that what I'm saying? I thought what I was saying... if you don't test anything, how can you possibly trust your own guesses and why should anyone else? They shouldn't trust my position either - they should challenge it with real supporting data... and not run their business on more guesswork.
|
|
#50
January 23rd, 2009, 07:36 AM
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Quote:
...it isn't my research to start with... it's research Connors did for longtail referrals... here it shows why you don't want to make the debate "only about that which you add to your Meta Description"... I agree with you - on your targeted term "your Meta Description is a million dollar bet"... But you seem to be stuck on the premise that you only want the traffic that likes the term you like... rather than appealing to all searchers no matter the phrase they searched for. That said: We agree on some points - an appealing listing "LIKELY" captures more clicks than something that looks like alphabet soup... We agree that "control" has power over "uncontrol" ...and we agree that high CTR is better than lower CTR... and the only difference we have is how we can generate a listing that can incorporate all 3 - everytime, for everyone, anywhere. With "visual page content"... you have "unlimited characters" With Meta Description... you have abour 250 Your "link anchors," "title elements," and factual page content define how longtail terms - the Meta has no bearing here "BUT" will be snippet if you match a word which is "lost control". But if you remove the Meta you in fact control what Google can use to describe your page thus have more control on your page... and if you find that say "nav links" are interfering with your snippets you have the control to re-organize the page content quickly and easily so Google gets the best snippets first for "any term". Lastly, a middle ground... Google will grab info from anywhere to describe the page as best it can. Since it uses <noscript></noscript> for flash and Javascript sites it stands to reason it will use that info for all sites. </header> <body><noscript> Meta Descriptions for exact phrases - you could have a million Meta Descriptions for targeted phrases Meta Descriptions for every longtail phrase - you could have a million Meta Descriptions that appeal "EVERYTIME" - you could have a million</noscript> ...I haven't tested this but I would bet it beats Meta Description & page content snippets HANDS DOWN... Sort of "DESIGN YOUR OWN SNIPPETS PER PHRASE" and if you make each sentence with the term in the middle - you ensure Google will only use that wordsmith phrase. ...and as a bonus... it isn't duplicated content, or stuffing, or hidden text... the best of "ALL WORLDS" Would Google "frown on this"? Innovative use of it's algorithm to solves a CTR problem that it hasn't addressed... I don't see why.
|
|
#51
February 27th, 2009, 06:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
search engine optimization
Thanks for giving such a nice information but after reading this post i am a bit confused. I am working in a SEO company, what i had studied yet about SEO is that meta tags as Meta keyword and description are important.
So can you please clarify my doubt.
|
|
#52
February 27th, 2009, 06:58 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Listen up! How many more times do you want it repeated. This thread gives a great explanation of on page including arguments for and against the points you mentioned. Its now up to you to decide which is the best strategy for you and your site. If you want a definitive yes or no answer to their importance then you need to set a little trap so that next time your site is spidered you can catch the little bugger and interrogate it until it tells you the truth! Or hire Indiana Jones as i hear that he is as good as anyone when it comes to finding the holey grail. Sorry for the sarcasm but everything you asked is on this thread.
|
|
#53
February 27th, 2009, 07:33 AM
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Quote:
I would tell your supervisor to join this forum and debate the merits of what they suggest are useful techniques in SEO... I can categorically say your company is incompetent if they believe Meta Keyword and Description are important to SEO.
|
|
#54
February 28th, 2009, 03:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
SEO Question
I have a question here.
I had completed all on page efforts to my website like Title, Meta description, <H1>tag insertion, URL rewriting etc. after doing it 12 keywords out off 20 lying on 3rd and 4th page and the rest keywords are also under 100 position. so what should i do now to bring all keywords to 1st page. I mean can i put any more on-page efforts or should i go for off-page efforts now. and please also suggest that what can i do in off page efforts.
|
|
#55
February 28th, 2009, 04:04 AM
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Re-read this thread to start with and determine what part's of what you are doing works...
...then get quality links.
|
|
#56
March 5th, 2009, 07:03 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
What about keywords density is it very important also? I ever see some top ranking website with very little of that primary keywords, and some top ranking website with very intensively used of the keywords.
This is what I read. "Every keyword phrase is different. One might do well with a 3.2 percent keyword density and another whereas the average density for another keyword phrase is close to about 6 percent. And if you were to use the 6 percent keyword density on your page to try to rank for the 3.2, then you'd be way too high, on the border of spamming."
__________________
Digital Marketing Agency | SEO Singapore | Web Design | Email Marketing | Directory Singapore | Web Design Gallery
|
|
#57
March 5th, 2009, 07:29 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Correct keyword density is some where between 0% and 100% It just does not matter. You can rank a site with any value!
|
|
#58
March 6th, 2009, 02:35 AM
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Quote:
The problem with "this is what I read" is: "how did they come up with their facts? The first rule of SEO... if it doesn't read well "it's useless"... If it's useless it doesn't attract links "naturally"... If it doesn't attract links... it doesn't rank! I'm sure you can pay someone to link to your keyword density ridden page... but if it doesn't read well... someone will report it... If someone reports it... you lose the link credits... If you lose the link credits... it doesn't rank! ... a better rule of thumb... ignore keyword density... and you rank better because you have more readable documents.
|
|
#59
March 23rd, 2009, 01:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
According to the on site optimization mention above;we can use title & description meta tags only.
The keywords used in the title tag should be present in description & body of page.Right!!!!!!! I see many sites sites using meta keywords,meta topic added more meta tags in the head field coz i read that before making to start u should take a look at your competitor site.If we see many sites added more keywords in title tag,using meta keywords and add all keywords in the description tag.That thing lead to confusion for any beginner.No one used precise one long keyword.Many webmaster putting max keywords in home page title. I am using webceo tool or checking the title,keyword prominence & keyword density all stuff. Any idea?
|
|
#60
March 23rd, 2009, 03:49 PM
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
@ desperateboy
Looking at your competitors site only tells you what they consider to be "optimisation" and chances are if it's stuffed full of keywords then it means they've got little idea. Following them is a bit like the blind leading the blind. Just because others do it doesn't mean you should. Using all the meta tags available to you won't make you rank any less well, but it won't help you either, ergo it's hurting you in the sense that you're wasting valuable time and effort that you could be spending on something more constructive. Massive amounts of keywords in the title suggests that they're trying to rank the homepage for every one of their targeted terms. That's just not going to work well. Much better to have a generic term for the homepage, and focus the inner pages on more specific terms -- one (or maybe two if they're similar) per page. You don't have to have the keywords in the page body, but it'd be an unusual page that didn't. Putting them in the description won't help. Re-read the bit about the meta description though -- I get the sense that you think the post is suggesting you should use this tag, whereas if anything it's the opposite. Ultimately though, it's the incoming links that are going to make or break your search results. The on-page stuff is really just the basic groundwork. You can rank #1 with good off-page and poor on-page, but not the other way around for anything other than uncompetitive terms. As for webceo, just ignore anything it says about keyword prominence, keyword density, etc. It's going to make you focus on the pointless things, and distract you from the stuff that counts. TBH I'd happily give my competitors a copy of it.
__________________
... I'll be back for breakfast
New to SEO? SEOChat SEO FAQsForum Rules and Posting Guidelines URL canonicalization code solutions Vigorously pursuing the floccinaucinihilipilification of cheap SEO tricks
|
|
| Viewing: SEO Chat Forums > Search Engine Strategies > Search Engine Optimization > On-Page Optimisation -- An Introductory Guide |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
Del.icio.us
Digg
Google
Spurl
Blink
Furl
Simpy
Y! MyWeb
Linear Mode
