Page 1 of 5 123 ... Last
  • Jump to page:
    #1
  1. Smoke me a kipper...
    SEO Chat Hero (2000 - 2499 posts)

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,472
    Rep Power
    76

    On-Page Optimisation -- An Introductory Guide


    It's an often asked question on the forums: what is on-page optimisation -- so here's a quick guide to what does and doesn't work. The intention is to dispel some common myths and to focus on those things that can provide a tangible improvement to your search result positions. It's not intended to be a one-stop shop for on-page SEO knowledge -- that would be beyond the scope of a single post.

    So what is on-page (or on-site) optimisation. This basically encompasses all those factors and elements on the page itself that can help you rank better. This are things that you have direct control over, unlike off-page (or off-site) optimisation where, although you can influence them, you're not in direct control as you're dependent on another site/webmaster.

    Head Elements <head></head>

    Title Element <title></title>

    This is perhaps the singularly most important element on the page for determining your position in the SERPs. Google, Yahoo! and MSN place a great deal of weight on any terms that appear within the title, so it's worth spending some time thinking about it.

    1) Keep it concise. The more terms you have in the title, then theoretically the less weight gets passed to each. Too short and you could miss out on some additional terms, too long and you start to lose the value. Quite often you'll see sites that try to include all their targeted keywords in the homepage title -- don't do it. Instead, have a dedicated page for each term where you can focus the title and page contents on just that term. Most sites will have more traffic landing on inner pages than the homepage, so there's just no need to try and get all your keywords on the one page.

    2) Don't repeat keywords unnecessarily. You get no additional benefit from repeating keywords and if done excessively it can end up looking ridiculous to potential visitors (see point 3 below). Take for example a title such as "Widgets - Red Widgets, Blue Widgets, White Widgets | Widget Store". This could easily be rewritten as "Red, White and Blue Widgets from the Widget Store", as well as several other possible variations.

    3) Let it read well. The title of your site in the search results will almost always be taken from the content of the title element on the page. It's important therefore that it reads well for any potential visitors. There's no point ranking #1 if you're going to lose visitors because your title puts them off. Such problems could be caused by excessive repetition (making it look spammy) for example.

    4) Including your site name. This is very much down to personal preference. Some like to include the site name in every title throughout the site, others only on the homepage. If your site has particularly good branding and is already well known then it may be worth including on every page -- those searching may be encouraged to select your listing in the search results by being reassured by the presence of your brand in the title. For most sites though it is of questionable value. Your homepage should be the main page that ranks for your site's name, thus repeating it across all pages will have no real benefit in terms of SEO, and all the while you're potentially reducing the weight of the other keywords (see point 1 above).

    5) Keep it unique. Often you see sites where the same title is repeated throughout (these tend to be dynamic sites that use a common header without the ability to adjust the title). This is a criminal waste of potential. Given the value of the title element, each page should have a title that isn't repeated elsewhere within the site. The title should be targeted to the contents of that page alone.

    6) WOW!! - Look, FREE Advice. As already mentioned, titles are there for potential visitors and not just search engines. When creating titles, also consider the benefit of terms that catch the eye when they appear in the SERPs, eg WOW, FREE, LOOK, NOW. Although they may not have any ranking benefit (sometimes, but not always), it could make your title stand out enough against those of your competitors to get the click-through even if you rank lower. EGOL wrote a post about this some time ago: Three Secrets to making a LOT more money!.

    7) Synonyms. If you're struggling to compete for a particular search query, don't discount the value of targeting a slightly less competitive synonym in your title for a while. It could result in more traffic than ranking lower for a more popular term, and your page will still have relevance to the original keyword. With more traffic comes the potential for more links, strengthening the page so that later you may be in a better position to compete for the original keyword.

    Meta Keywords <meta name="keywords" content="" />

    Here we go with the first of the misconceptions. Meta keywords have no real-world effect on your SERPs. Let's repeat that so it really sinks in: meta keywords have no real-world effect on your SERPs.

    When search engines first appeared way back in the very early days of the internet, they were very basic at best and a far cry from the search engines we know today. It wasn't long before SEOs started manipulating their meta keyword tags, stuffing them full of unrelated terms and generally abusing their original purpose. Search engines therefore counteracted this by ignoring meta keywords in their ranking algorithms. When Google came onto the scene, meta keywords were already out of use for determining relevancy and ranking positions.

    Unfortunately, the perceived value of meta keywords has still persisted against all evidence to the contrary. Often an argument is put forward that if they don't hurt, why not use them. They do hurt your time though -- spending 5 minutes per page working on a meta keywords list adds up. On a ten page site that's nearly an hour, on a hundred page site that's a full working day! If you've got that much time to waste needlessly you need to find yourself a hobby!

    Another frequently asked question is "how do I format the keywords". Should they be comma separated, commas with spaces, one word or multi word terms, etc. Since meta keywords don't affect your ranks and play no part in SEO, it really doesn't make any difference. Just leave them out, then you don't need to worry. Instead worry about how much content your competitors developed while you were dwelling on your meta keywords.

    Meta Description <meta name="description" content="" />

    Now to one of the most contentious issues we currently have on SEOChat: the meta description tag. First of all, like the meta keywords tag, search engines do not use the content to determine relevancy and search result positions. Adding or editing your meta description will have no effect on where you appear for any given search term.

    Where the meta description is still used is as a potential source for the page description that appears in the search results. Great, so a well crafted meta description can give us a nice boost in click-through when our site appears for a search; where's the contention there? I'm glad you asked -- read on.

    It was Fathom who first raised the issue on SEOChat, that relying on meta descriptions for your site's SERPs description is a problem for several reasons. As already mentioned, the meta description is just one potential source for the search engines. The main search engines all have the ability to create snippets -- taking one or two highly relevant strings from the page content and formatting it into a description, emphasising the searched terms in the process. The page content isn't restricted to a small number of characters as is the meta description, with the resultant benefit that you can include far more possible search matches than you ever could with a meta description. The page content also has the added benefit that it does contribute towards relevancy and ranking, unlike the meta tag. If we allow the search engines to create our description for us out of our content, there is a much greater chance that the description will be more accurately matched to the search term. Don't forget that your pages will naturally rank for many more search terms than you can anticipate, and there is no way you can craft a meta description that will be relevant for all of them.

    So why then don't we create a meta description as a catch-all for those times that the search engines can't create a good snippet from our content? Well you can, but ultimately you're hiding the problem -- the problem that your content isn't optimised for that search term. Far better to take a look at the content and adjust it where necessary (either editing the existing text, or creating new content), with the added benefit that improving it will also potentially help your rankings.

    Ok, so I've removed the meta description tag from my page, but now when it appears for a site: search in Google, all I get as the description is the main navigation links, how is that supposed to be helpful and what to do about it? Well, you needn't do anything really. Those navigation links are appearing because they're the first thing on the page, and without a search term in the query there's nothing to base a snippet on, ergo Google just uses the first piece of content. How many people though come to your site via a simple site: search rather than using a search term? I would suggest that almost none do, and that the only person that does a site: search is yourself. Potentially a competitor might, but then they're not going to be a beneficial visitor that buys something, or clicks on your ads, etc. If you really are concerned about your navigation appearing thus, then move it. Adjust the layout and make sure that it's your content that appears first in the page structure and the navigation later --again, resolving the underlying issue rather than relying on a meta description to cover it up.

    Many are scared that removing their meta descriptions will impact them negatively, to which I would say that myself and several other members have all done so and have seen no decrease in SERPs positions, nor any reduction in click-through rates. The whole issue of whether or not to use meta descriptions has been discussed at great length on these forums, so I would suggest reading those posts as well.

    Meta Robots <meta name="robots" content="" />

    This is one meta tag that you do want to pay attention to, even though most pages won't require it. By default search engines will try to index and crawl your site, so inserting index,follow is just a waste of typing time.

    If you don't want the page to appear in the search results, then use noindex. Likewise, if you don't want search engines to follow any links on the page, then use nofollow. Noarchive instructs the search engines the you don't want a cached version to be available. It won't stop them indexing the page though.

    Other Meta Tags

    If you look at some sites there's a whole list of additional meta tags appearing in their head section. None of these will have an impact on your search results. Revisit-after is often used in the mistaken belief that it tells search engines how often you want them to revisit your site, but in actual fact it does nothing of the sort.

    Body elements <body></body>

    Moving on to the page body there are one or two elements worth looking at.

    Site Navigation and Internal Links

    It seems obvious to build the site navigation so that search engines can follow it, but many sites even now don't do so. Javascript and Flash based navigation is going to make it very difficult for search engines to discover the links to your inner pages. As their capabilities improve they're able to discover links that they couldn't only a few years ago, but you don't want to have to rely on them playing catch-up to your site's technology.

    Simple html text links are guaranteed to be seen by search engines. If you're not sure whether or not your links are search engine friendly, either look at the source code of the page, or view it in a text browser such as Lynx (available as a Firefox plugin). Text links are preferable to image links since the anchor text (the text you click on) imparts relevancy to the linked page better than an image's alt attribute does. With CSS there's no reason why a plain html text link can't look just as good as any other type.

    Be wary of including too many links in your navigation. Yes, you want to encourage search engines to follow links to your inner pages, but each link takes an equal share of "link juice". There's only a finite amount of link juice (Google Pagerank) available to share amongst the links, so if you spread it too thinly then all the links will suffer. Concentrate on passing sufficient amounts to your most important pages first, and as your site grows and attracts more incoming links you can add more internal links later. How many is too many? There's no golden figure, but I'd start to get concerned above 50.

    The flow of link juice can also be controlled through the use of link-level nofollowing. By adding rel="nofollow" to certain links, you can remove them from the link equation, and any link juice that would previously have passed to them will now be spread amongst your other links. There are usually a number of pages that tend to be linked from every other page, for example "Contact Us", "Terms and Conditions", "Privacy Policy", yet these pages aren't going to benefit you as landing pages from the search results and instead act as link juice sinks. By nofollowing links to these pages you can stop the flow of link juice to them which can instead be directed to those pages that will help you rank.

    There's a recent post about link architecture on the Google Webmaster Central Blog. A useful read if you're new to the subject.

    At this point it's worth also looking at contextual links; these are the links that appear within a body of text -- unlike navigation links which tend to exist in their own block as a simple list of links. Although perhaps not strictly "on-page", since you're using them to influence another page on the site, they are still "on-site" so it seems appropriate to include them here. Having said that, there is an argument that benefit can be had for the page that the link exists on, with its relevancy increased just that little bit more, in the same way that linking to external authority sites on a topic can increase your relevancy for that topic as well.

    Contextual links work exceptionally well at imparting relevancy to the linked page since relevancy comes not only from the anchor text, but also from the surrounding text. One of the reasons Wikipedia has such a strong presence in the search results is because every page is linked via these in-content links. If you haven't already done so, take a moment to consider using similar methods in your site if you can. There'd be little point doing so for a six page business site (you'd not gain anything over and above the standard naviagtion and it could look a little silly), but for larger sites with substantial information sections then it should be possible. For an ecommerce store, you could have a blog or reviews section, with articles that include contextual links to individual products.

    Hidden Links. Don't even think about it; you will be found out eventually, and you will suffer as a result.

    Heading Tags

    H1 through H6 are heading tags. These are used to structure the page, with H1 being the main heading. Think of these as the headings in a newspaper. The main heading for an article would be the H1 tag. Sub-headings that break up the article into sections would then be the H2 tag. Should any of those sections contain their own sub-sections, these would then use the H3 tag. As you can imagine, it's rare that you ever use all six levels of heading on a page.

    For quite some time, search engines have put additional emphasis on keywords that appear within heading tags. However, as is so often the case, once this became widely known it was quite common to see excessive keyword stuffing and general abuse of the tags, with entire paragraphs appearing as "headings". As a result they no longer have quite the impact they once did, although the H1 and H2 headings still carry a little more weight than standard text.

    Since the headings do help structure the page, and some additional benefit can be had from using them, I would recommend including them on the page. As with the title element, headings should be unique and be relevant to the context. There's no point having a sitewide H1 tag with the same text repeated throughout the site. This is not what it was designed to do, and you'd be wasting its potential if you did so.

    The appearance of text within a heading tag can easily be changed using CSS to fit in with your site's design, so there's really no excuse not to use them.

    Bold/Strong and Italic/Emphasis tags

    It's quite common to see people recommending their use for your keywords. I am not convinced that they have any worthwhile impact any longer. By all means use them for the benefit of the site visitor, but don't expect to see any real-world benefit for your rankings. Ok, they may help you improve from #900 to #500, but once you get into the first few pages for even a relatively uncompetitive search term you're not going to see much, if any change. You can easily spot those sites that still put weight on these tags helping their SERPs, every tenth word is in bold, it makes it much harder to read and frankly, looks ridiculous.

    Image Alt Attributes

    These have been subject to much abuse over the years as some SEOs would pack them full of keywords. Search engines are wise to this now, and algorithms have moved on, so you'd not see any benefit from keyword stuffing now. Also, with the advent of image searches, far more benefit can be had by focusing the image alt attribute on gaining ranks there rather than trying to manipulate them for the benefit of the page. Make the image alt attribute short, succinct, and relevant to the image content. Make sure they read well, because they can sometimes appear as part of the snippet in the standard search results.

    Ranking for Image Search

    Whilst we're on the subject of images and image searches, there are one or two things you can do to help your chances of ranking well there. As already mentioned, think about the image's alt attribute. If you're going to rename your image, treat it as you would the page filename, making it short and relevant to the image content. An image's relevancy is also determined by the context of the page in which it sits, so think about where you're putting the image.

    Title Attributes

    Not to be confused with the title element, the title attribute is usually to be found as part of a link, eg <a href="#" title="The title attribute"></a>, although it can also be found in images and other tags as well. These do not influence your rankings, so use them for the benefit of your visitors by all means, but don't focus on them for SEO purposes.

    Other Aspects

    Filenames (URLs)

    You've got to give your file/page a URL anyway, so you might as well include a keyword or two in there if you're using static html files or URL rewriting. Don't obsess about it though. Having your keywords in the URL is only a very small factor in the algorithm, and for competitive search terms you're not really going to see any real-world difference. The main benefit comes from external links that use the URL as the anchor text, thus those keywords then become part of the anchor text.

    If you've got an existing site that uses dynamic URLs, don't rush to implement URL rewriting in the hope of getting a boost in the SERPs. You're just as likely to cause more harm than anything if you don't implement it properly, coupled with the inevitable disruption to your SERPs whilst the changes are indexed (even if you do use 301 redirects). There's much to consider with dynamic v static URLs which goes beyond the scope of this post, needless to say a quick search on SEOChat will pull up many existing posts on the matter. It's also worth reading a recent post on the Google Webmaster Central Blog about dynamic v static URLs.

    There's another myth that too many subfolders in the URL will reduce the importance of the page, eg /cars/saloons/make/red.html is less preferable to /red-make-saloon.html. It really makes no difference. What is a factor is how many clicks away from the homepage it is. A page linked directly from the homepage (which usually will have the greatest link juice to give) will tend to have a better chance of ranking than one buried deep in the site that can only be reached via three other pages first. I tend to steer clear of including too many subfolders in the URL as it makes it more likely that as the site grows and I have to move pages around, then I'll need to change the URL as some point. With less subfolders in the URL, there's less likelihood that I'll need to do so. With a good navigation structure and breadcrumb trail, it should be quite evident to the site visitor where they are in the site without relying on the URL as an indicator.

    Keyword Density

    Let's put another misconception to rest: keyword density. Like the meta keywords tag, keyword density continues to be touted as being of benefit to your ranking position. Numbers such as 2-5% density are bandied about as being the key to ranking well. Let's be clear that these numbers are just fool's gold. Like the argument for meta keywords, search engines have moved on and what worked once doesn't necessarily mean it still works today. Search engine algorithms have far more factors at their disposal with which to judge relevance, and have long outgrown such a crude method as counting the number of times a term appears on the page.

    Content should be written with the reader in mind, and trying to force a set percentage with which the keyword appears is inevitably going to lead to poor quality writing, in turn reducing the likelihood that others will link to the page.

    When taken to extremes, excessive use of keywords in the content can even harm, triggering spam filters and resulting in a decline in SERPs. Often termed "over optimisation", this is something of a misnomer as there's only really "well optimised" and "badly optimised".

    It is perfectly plausible that a site should rank #1 for a term without ever including it on the page as a direct result of incoming links that pass relevancy for that term. I would however still recommend that you at least include it in the page title as a minimum.

    Absolute v Relative URLs

    It seems to be something of a myth that search engines prefer absolute rather than relative URLs. As far as I can tell, there's no difference between the two. Given the choice, I tend to use absolute URLs, including the full domain name, for internal links. I do this not because the search engines prefer it, but in case my content gets scraped. Not all scrapers remove the internal links, so it offers some degree of protection in those circumstances as I still have links back to my site. On the other hand, it's suggested that relative URLs don't require an additional DNS lookup by the browser, so can be faster for the site visitor (I couldn't say for certain whether or not that is the case, and it's not something I'm inclined to devote time to finding out).

    W3C Validation

    Having a site that fully complies with the W3C guidelines is not, in itself, going to help you rank better. Yes, it may be an indication of quality web development, and it's certainly worthwhile aiming for (accessibility for all, etc), but it's not an indication of relevance, which is what the search engines are looking for. It would make no sense to discount the relevancy of Stephen Hawking's scientific theories to the origins of the universe on the basis that he hasn't self closed a line break tag, or not escaped an ampersand.

    Search engines have become very good at crawling even the most badly formed pages. If your browser can make sense of the html, then it's safe to assume that so can the search engines.

    I would also suggest that by investing time in understanding W3C validation rules, it contributes towards your own personal development. The more you understand about the construction and development of a website, the more you gain personally, and the more skills you have to offer a client. The same goes for understanding server-side languages such as php or python.

    HTML v XHTML + CSS

    Again, it makes no difference to the relevance of the page. Whether you choose to build it using HTML Transitional or XHTML Strict, it's the content that the search engines are interested in. CSS helps reduce code bloat, makes maintenance of the site much simpler, etc, but is not going to help you rank higher. Tables may affect the order in which your content appears, but rest assured that the search engines will still read the content.

    Site Layout and Design

    Search engines aren't really interested in how pretty your site looks, nor whether the content or the navigation comes first. The only time it could become an issue is if the page is so big, with the main content at the end of it, that the crawlers abandon the page (timeout) before they reach the content. If that's the case, then it's likely that so will your site visitors.

    Changing the design of your site, provided that you keep titles, content, and URLs the same is unlikely to have much impact on your SERPs. There could be some degree of fluctuation experienced temporarily, or if the new design substantially increases or decreases the number of links off each page then the change could be more long term as a result of your internal linking pattern.

    External Javascript/CSS

    Worth doing for the benefit of your site visitors (page loading times and browser caching) and for site maintenance benefits, but search engine crawlers will easily read past these if they're embedded in the page.

    Robots.txt

    This file can be used to block crawlers from certain pages and folders on your site. Make sure you don't accidentally block them from pages you do want indexed. I personally don't really count the robots.txt file as part of on-page SEO, since it's not directly contributing to where you rank (you don't actually need a robots.txt file at all).

    Remember, if you block pages with robots.txt you're not preventing link juice flowing to them and it is theoretically possible for such pages to still appear in the search results based on the information given by the links pointing to them. To shut off the flow of link juice, add rel="nofollow" to such links.

    Sitemaps

    An XML sitemap is useful for larger sites. It'll potentially help crawlers locate new pages, and recently updated pages, deep in the site faster than relying on a standard crawl pattern alone. There is, however, no guarantee that they'll index those pages -- you still need to give them adequate reason for doing so (quality, unique content and enough incoming link juice to persuade them that it's a valuable page)

    Html sitemaps are there more for the benefit of visitors than crawlers. On a larger site, there'll be too many links to provide adequate link juice to any particular page, and for smaller sites then it's simple enough to link every page from every other page. Of course, if your site's navigation isn't search engine friendly, then an html sitemap can help the crawlers find those pages, but a better solution would be to change your navigation to one that is search engine friendly in the first place.

    URL Canonicalisation and Avoiding Inadvertent Duplicate Content

    First of all, duplicate content on your site is not going to get you penalised unless its blatant and deliberately designed to manipulate rankings. It's very easy, particularly with dynamic sites, to have the same page accessible through different URLs. A classic case is www.yoursite.com and www.yoursite.com/index.html -- in both cases it's the same page but two different URLs. Likewise, with dynamic sites that have muliple parameters in the query string, changing the order of the parameters makes for a different URL.

    In such circumstances, Google is very good at determining which is the most apt version to use. However, it's always best to avoid the situation arising in the first place. Make sure all your internal links point to the one version you want to use, and set up 301 redirects for the others if possible.

    The principal problem is not that you'll get penalised, but rather that you're not directing all available link juice to one version. By splitting the link juice across multiple versions, you're wasting the page's potential ranking ability.

    There's a section in the SEO FAQs about URL canonicalisation. Do read through it when you have time.

    continued...

    Comments on this post

    • pro_seo agrees : Great Work!!
    • seomonkeymanocp agrees
    • Cataclysmic agrees : Awesome. You're the first person I've run out of rep for.
    • fathom agrees
    • RentPlanet.ca agrees
    • abefroman99 agrees
    • joe@biznet agrees : Thanks alot Jag for tkaing the time to create this great resource!!!
    • europa agrees : Awesome.
    • RocknRolli agrees : this is awesome!
    • Minks agrees : Great post - many thanks
    • terriwells agrees : If this thread isn't stickied, I think it should be.
    • tsquareb agrees
    • ClickyB agrees : Outstanding.
    • seogoat agrees
    • Xaver agrees : I am only on 3rd paragraph, but this article is well worth the repution I can give to it.
    • dwhitmore agrees
    • thevikrant agrees : Nice.
    • jsteele823 agrees : Just realized I never gave you credit for this, Jag. Great post!
    • LegendZelda agrees
    • ricksonsmith agrees
    • LeMedia agrees
    • Mushu agrees : Thanks for sharing the knowledge
    • nazre agrees : Great work.
    • Vignesh agrees : Awesome.... Can you pls tel Where can i follow you
    • ChillDot agrees
    • daniel_toader agrees
    • paoloyanez agrees
    • faiha agrees : great work. i do follow this informations
    • bargainpodseo agrees
    • Robin johannsen agrees
    • emedianetwork agrees : Very Very great post, i really like the effort...
    • FKK agrees
    • competeinfotech agrees : That is a very good guide for the people who knows the seo ,very good post indeed, I think that you have missed is - Google Analytics Code.
    • checksoft agrees
    • nizamuddin agrees : nice job
    Last edited by JagNet; Dec 17th, 2008 at 03:22 AM. Reason: link to EGOL's thread
    ... I'll be back for breakfast
    New to SEO? SEOChat SEO FAQs
    Forum Rules and Posting Guidelines
    URL canonicalization code solutions
    Vigorously pursuing the floccinaucinihilipilification of cheap SEO tricks
  2. #2
  3. Smoke me a kipper...
    SEO Chat Hero (2000 - 2499 posts)

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,472
    Rep Power
    76

    Continued from previous post....


    Arguments to the Contrary

    At this point there will no doubt be those that can "prove" that a site ranks for a search term because of their meta keywords and description. Dell, for example, ranks extremely well for "computer", yet the only occurrence of that keyword on their site is in their meta data. Surely that's proof in itself that meta data does impact rankings. Wrong, so very wrong. -- NB, the term also appears in their title now, however a quick check on archive.org shows that it's only recently that it appeared.

    It's an all too common error for those new to SEO, and for that matter those with more experience, to misinterpret what they're seeing. Just because you can see something that you believe to be the cause, it doesn't necessarily mean that it is the real cause. In the case above with Dell, it's not the meta data that the rankings are based on, but rather the incoming links. For a long time Dell did not have the word "computer" anywhere on the page, but still ranked just as highly because of the strength of its incoming links that did use the word "computers" in the link anchor text.

    Likewise, just because you see a site ranking that has keyword stuffed image alt attributes, or hidden text, don't assume that it's ranking because of these. It is in fact ranking despite these, not as a result of them, and if it breaks search engine guidelines, it's only a question of time before they come unstuck.

    Another argument to the contrary is that by inserting a nonsensical word in the meta data, and the page then ranking for it, proves that meta data is used for rankings. This is not a realistic experiment however, and it would only require another page to use that same nonsensical word in its content to outrank the former page.

    If you're going to test different factors, don't discount the presence of external influencing factors. It's easy to assume that x happened because y changed, but x may have happened anyway due to a change in algorithms, or z occurred without you realising it.


    Summary

    On-page SEO is actually a very simple process. In short, include your keyword in your title element, in an H1 tag, and possibly in the body text as well. Make sure that the page is accessible to the search engines (that it's linked from at least one location and isn't blocked by robots.txt). If you're going to give the page a "static" filename, then include your keywords since you have to put something there anyway, but don't worry unduly about doing so. It's more important to have a URL that's unlikely to change in the future than squeezing keywords in.

    Everything else is just picking at the edges -- don't work harder, work smarter. Focus on what does work and works well, and the time you save ignoring the rest can be put to use developing better content.

    Tools

    I personally have a bit of an issue with most "SEO tools". Very few have any real value, and can lull the inexperienced into a false sense of security, believing that they're site is "perfectly optimised" when really it's lacking in many areas. Tools are only as capable as those creating them and most are created to attract links and visitors to their site rather than to help you personally. Not only that, but many are out of date as well -- keyword density tool anyone?! The best all-round tools I know of are experience, and your own brain.

    For on-page SEO there are a couple of tools that I'd recommend however for trouble shooting the site.

    1) Lynx Browser. Lynx is a text browser, so it sees the page much as a crawler would -- no images, javascript, flash, etc. If you're not that experienced with html and web development to be able to look at the source code and understand what's going on "under the hood", then I recommend viewing the site in Lynx. If you can't see your navigation or your content, then neither can the search engines.

    Lynx is freely available as a Firefox plugin, which makes it easy to install. There's no excuse not to have it to hand. I use it quite a lot when looking at problem sites posted on these forums. You can find it at https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/1944

    2) Google Webmaster Tools. This is an essential tool for most site owners. It'll inform you if your site has problem pages (timeouts, 404s, etc) and is used by Google to contact you about your site should the worst happen and you're getting a penalty (for example if you've been hacked and your site is no longer safe to visit). They don't contact you in all cases though, so don't think that because you've not heard from them everything's ok. Should the worst happen and you have been penalised, then you can submit a reconsideration request via GWT (after cleaning up the problem). You can also test robots.txt files before uploading them to make sure that you're not accidentally blocking any pages. There's a host of other tools in there as well, but this isn't the place to go into them in depth. Suffice to say, if you're not doing so already, then set up a GWT account for your site at www.google.com/webmasters/tools/

    One thing to remember about GWT though, is that it's designed for the average webmaster, not the experienced SEO. So yes, there is a section about your meta description tags, but that doesn't mean that the arguments against them are any less valid, and in case you're wondering, if you deliberately don't have a meta description tag on the site then it doesn't actually warn you about it.


    Conclusion

    You don't have to take our word on the value or non-value of these page elements, in fact in some ways I'd rather you didn't. A good SEO will always question what they're being told does and doesn't work. It is, after all, that lack of questioning that keeps notions about the value of meta keywords alive. There are many many posts on these forums discussing each of the factors above, and I recommend reading them to see the alternative viewpoints. Test them for yourself and come to your own conclusions.

    On-page SEO can be very effective, but it is just one piece in the whole puzzle, so don't ignore link building and off-page SEO (particularly for more competitive search terms) or you'll still be disappointed at your site's position in Google.

    By the way, if anyone can think of something I've missed out, point it out and I'll add it in.


    Credits

    djstreet, for his post The Sticky for Meta Description, keywords, keyword density, and title tags.

    Fathom, for first raising the issue about Meta Description tags, and his continued efforts to break existing dogmas.

    EGOL, for the idea of using attention grabbing words in the title in his post Three Secrets to making a LOT more money!

    Plus all those SEOChat members who have also argued the points above every time they come up, but for whom it's not possible to credit individually.




    Added by ClickyB:

    Folks: In the interest of keeping this thread manageable (and complying with the forum rules):

    Please don't add a post just to say: "Thanks" / "Great Post" etc etc...

    If you wish to add such comments please click the "scales icon" on this (or the previous) post, and add your (agree) comment directly (and - if you have any - give him the RP he deserves for his efforts).

    Comments on this post

    • gazzahk agrees : Thank you for taking the time..
    • pagi agrees : Nice one, says all that needs to be said. Sticky it and lets hope people read it.
    • RocknRolli agrees : Why not try to on-page-optimize in any possible and decent way?
    • lewisdb agrees : Thanks for taking the time to do this, it is apreciated
    • Prof.stan agrees
    • NuArtisan agrees : I like the summary
    • BaileySpeaks agrees : Thanks ... was a good start for a SEO newb learning stuff!
    • daniel_toader agrees : Clear and to the point
    • paoloyanez agrees : Well explained. Very clear and understandable...
    • FKK : I like this post
    • webseomall agrees : hi JagNet great post!
    Last edited by ClickyB; Jul 2nd, 2009 at 07:38 PM. Reason: Forgive me Jagnet (awesome posts here btw) I just don't want this thread to become unmanageable).
  4. #3
  5. No Profile Picture
    Registered User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6
    Rep Power
    0
    Ok, you've basically said that very little works for on site seo, well what in your opinion would represent a sucessful strategy for on site optimisation procedure?
    Last edited by gnarlysurfer; Oct 9th, 2008 at 05:27 PM. Reason: a bit too much!
  6. #4
  7. rod@missionop.com
    SEO Chat Mastermind (5000+ posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Palm Beach Gardens FL 33410
    Posts
    17,292
    Rep Power
    0
    Superb compilation... a suggestion though.

    Long, long posts lose people... better to stick a list of links and a "snippet" than the whole discussion in a single thread... because each point has side issues and you can quick get way off topic and not realize it.

    IMHO.

    [will read as I get time]
  8. #5
  9. Smoke me a kipper...
    SEO Chat Hero (2000 - 2499 posts)

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,472
    Rep Power
    76
    Originally Posted by fathom
    Superb compilation... a suggestion though.

    Long, long posts lose people... better to stick a list of links and a "snippet" than the whole discussion in a single thread... because each point has side issues and you can quick get way off topic and not realize it.

    IMHO.

    [will read as I get time]
    I'll definitely take your points on board for future "guides". I tried to keep it concise but it somewhat ran away with me -- believe it or not this is actually the condensed version

    Looking forward to your views on the post when you've had chance to read it. No doubt there'll be a couple of points you don't fully agree with but I'm always happy to debate them.
  10. #6
  11. Smoke me a kipper...
    SEO Chat Hero (2000 - 2499 posts)

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,472
    Rep Power
    76
    Originally Posted by gnarlysurfer
    Ok, you've basically said that very little works for on site seo, well what in your opinion would represent a sucessful strategy for on site optimisation procedure?
    That is basically the point, that there's very little you can do to the page itself that makes any significant difference. Keyword in your title, in your H1 tag, and in the page body, make sure it's well linked internally, and you're basically done. Time to move on to the next piece of content. I probably spend on average no more than 5 minutes working on a page's optimisation, the remainder is spent working on the content itself.

    Sure, you could spend time putting your keywords in bold, checking keyword density percentages, crafting your meta description and keyword tags, etc but none of this is going to have a real effect on your search results. You can kid yourself that it's time well spent, and many do because no one likes to admit they wasted time on something that won't work.

    An analogy would be submitting essays at school. You can spend all the time choosing the nicest font, adjusting the kerning, putting it in an attractive binder, etc but at the end of the day what counts is the content -- everything else is just extraneous frills to make you feel better about it.
  12. #7
  13. No Profile Picture
    Registered User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    20
    Rep Power
    0
    Wow! This post is great. I learned new things about SEO but I have a question regarding "meta keywords". What are your trying to say? Meta Keywords are not important in SEO nowadays? I'm new in this SEO field and as far as I know, meta kws are very important in optimization. I read some post before in other forums and in other blog post (I think..). I'm a little bit confused...

    I will be very glad if you will help me... thanks.
  14. #8
  15. Smoke me a kipper...
    SEO Chat Hero (2000 - 2499 posts)

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,472
    Rep Power
    76
    Originally Posted by myx20
    What are your trying to say? Meta Keywords are not important in SEO nowadays?
    Yep, that's exactly what I, and many other experienced members, are saying. There are still many who preach about the value of meta keywords, because they themselves read a post from someone who had read a post by someone who'd been told that meta keywords are important. Rather than test for themselves, they've taken the advice at face value, ignoring the possibility that the information may be out of date or just plain misinformed. The established dogmas therefore get passed on, supported by nothing but blind faith and the opportunity for money for nothing from less scrupulous "SEOs".

    The value of meta keywords is, however, easily tested by anyone. Simply remove them from your page for a month, then return them to the page for a month, remove for another month, return for another month, and so on. You'll find that the page neither moves up nor down as a result. You may still experience movement for reasons outside of the meta tag influence, and this is why you need to repeat it several times to discount these erroneous results.
  16. #9
  17. rod@missionop.com
    SEO Chat Mastermind (5000+ posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Palm Beach Gardens FL 33410
    Posts
    17,292
    Rep Power
    0
    Originally Posted by JagNet
    Meta Description <meta name="description" content="" />

    It was Fathom who first raised the issue on SEOChat, that relying on meta descriptions for your site's SERPs description is a problem for several reasons.
    I hammer this point hard because Google has indicated it's wealth... and while I agree with Google [on one aspect] I wholeheartedly disagree on another [that they don't mention]
    1. Everyone that doesn't hire a professional and can't do their own coding... should use follow Google's advice and use Meta Descriptions because they likely have site design issues that they cannot deal with and since they ain't hiring a professional -- listing appeal can well be lost for their best phrases.

    2. But every professional SEO is experienced in "code" and every person here that wishes to "do their own" must learn to read and edit code - and as such "hiding coding problems" with a magical thing call Meta Description isn't professional SEOing, it's not even amateur hour for SEOing... it's just plain stupidity... hiding things that need fixing.

    3. Any professional pushing the value of Meta Description "HERE" is incompetent to offer advice for any developing SEO... if you're merely a website owner and not a SEO - Google's advice is a solid tip... "if" you can't edit your code... anyone suggesting they are a SEO or wish to learn... has to be able to edit code and therefore can fix any design flaws and as such no need to use Meta Descriptions.

    4. Impact on CTR - absolute RUBBISH! It's rubbish because everyone that says that... never tested it... had they... they would immediately realize - day to day flux makes it absolutely impossible to determine... I've have as many "drops" in clicks when using Meta as "increases" in clicks when using snippets... as the reverse which suggests any conclusion even with observations are totally spectulative.

    5. If people wish to use Meta Description "THAT'S GREAT"... but advising people to do as you "because you like it" isn't qualified advice... it's a preference.

    Matt Cutts call SEO "power users" and openly admits that public comments, tips and suggestions made my him, Google, and privately via the Webmaster Console are not meant for power users... they are for the person that can't do SEO.... surely then any person using Google's references as claim backup... is claiming they "ARE NOT" a SEO themselves.

    Comments on this post

    • maheshkumar agrees : Yes.Seo is very Important
  18. #10
  19. rod@missionop.com
    SEO Chat Mastermind (5000+ posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Palm Beach Gardens FL 33410
    Posts
    17,292
    Rep Power
    0
    Originally Posted by JagNet
    Be wary of including too many links in your navigation. Yes, you want to encourage search engines to follow links to your inner pages, but each link takes an equal share of "link juice"...
    While I tend to agree here... There are exceptions -- and in this case alot of exceptions.

    In the last week of June this year I started Funerals-USA.com and it currently has a bit more than 60 links in main navigation where 51 link go the state funeral blogs and from there these link to cities & town pages and also major cities that have their own blogs.

    Almost all of these secondary [State] nav menus have 200 - 500+ links per page and for the most part every single page of about 10,000 rank top 10 with 60% in top 5 or at #1.

    Be that as it may, and the fact that this was accomplished in less than 2 months on a brand new domains... suggests a few alternations in common SEO thinking.

    As such, we should clarify "broad statements" on navigation links...

    The more broadly focus your domain is; the less links to sub pages you should have. If your domain is extremely broad [like Health & Fitness or gambling] you should attempt to stay to 10-15 at you top menus and as you move down you nav tree double or triple the number of links. [this also assume you number of links you can get to the home page and all important sub pages.

    If you are going to have difficulty in acquiring "deeplinks" to sub pages you are better to increase the volume of links on/from the home page... because it's more important that most internal pages get link juice than reserving it for the most important pages; targeting more competitive phrases.

    That's a bit of a left turn from the usual advice... but SEO isn't one advice fits for all situations.

    Comments on this post

    • paoloyanez agrees : A great SEO walking in the face of the planet!
    Last edited by fathom; Oct 13th, 2008 at 06:50 AM.
  20. #11
  21. No Profile Picture
    Registered User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    20
    Rep Power
    0
    This is very informative post. Thank you for this.

    Umm.. can I ask you a question? Umm... why you used the word "optimisation" instead of using "optimization"?

    Thanks again.
  22. #12
  23. rod@missionop.com
    SEO Chat Mastermind (5000+ posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Palm Beach Gardens FL 33410
    Posts
    17,292
    Rep Power
    0
    Originally Posted by myx20
    This is very informative post. Thank you for this.

    Umm.. can I ask you a question? Umm... why you used the word "optimisation" instead of using "optimization"?

    Thanks again.
    Brit Empire [Aussy, NZ, South Africa, India, etc.] spelling

    As per these definitions:

    When used in the context of Search Engine Optimisation, it is a series of steps that promote a webpage or website on the internet and strive to ...
    www.aprompt.co.uk/support/glossary.asp

    A further screening experiment, after an initial screening has indicated the approximate conditions for success. ...
    www.mole.ac.uk/lims/project/glossary.html

    is a scientific approach to solving problems, the purpose of which is to improve on the subjective aspects of decision-making; thus improving ...
    www.quantum3.co.za/CI%20Glossary.htm

    gaining the best or most favourable outcome
    www.tki.org.nz/r/technology/curriculum/p85_86_e.php

    A (mathematical) process to determine the optimal transport strategy
    www.konsult.leeds.ac.uk/public/level1/sec17/index.htm

    The process of tweaking a site to gain higher rankings in a search engine's results.
    www.denialdesign.co.uk/glossary.asp

    The process of applying strategy and tactics to web content in order to improve search ranking. Optimisation is the UK spelling of optimization. ...
    www.onpageone.co.uk/seo-glossary.html

    Optimization Optimisation is the practice of analysing and making changes to a number of different factorsrelating to a website. ...
    www.e-prominence.co.uk/knowledge-base/search-engine-marketing-glossary.htm

    Design procedure of considering various values of various relevant sizes and other parameters until the combination is found which is best or optimum.
    www.humanpoweredflying.propdesigner.co.uk/html/body_glossary.html

    Comments on this post

    • JagNet agrees : thanks! i knew it was only a matter of time before someone asked that.
  24. #13
  25. No Profile Picture
    Permanently Banned
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Delhi
    Posts
    80
    Rep Power
    0

    Angry on page optimization


    hello guys, i read now this post very usefull thanks for this topic. but you can share some seo knowledge ?? how to increse website google rank. becuase my site only yahoo not googel that how to increase ranking in google search engine.

    Thanks in advance.
    Last edited by JagNet; Nov 7th, 2008 at 03:03 AM. Reason: removed quote
  26. #14
  27. Entrepreneur
    SEO Chat Scholar (3000 - 3499 posts)

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New Delhi India
    Posts
    3,254
    Rep Power
    922
    Originally Posted by neeruneeraj
    how to increse website google rank. becuase my site only yahoo not googel that how to increase ranking in google search engine.
    Read more here and start new thread ....

    Comments on this post

    • MMS Systems agrees : ?Hi
    • chenthil agrees
    • PeterElmkvist agrees : Good Information For SEO optimizer
    You do your business I do mine because you are you and I am I If we meet it is nice.
  28. #15
  29. rod@missionop.com
    SEO Chat Mastermind (5000+ posts)

    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Palm Beach Gardens FL 33410
    Posts
    17,292
    Rep Power
    0
    Originally Posted by neeruneeraj
    hello guys, i read now this post very usefull thanks for this topic. but you can share some seo knowledge ?? how to increse website google rank. becuase my site only yahoo not googel that how to increase ranking in google search engine.

    Thanks in advance.
    The question is rather vague... there are 212,470 threads with 606,142 posts by 53,794 members... surely you can find something a little more specific within those.

    Comments on this post

    • bille agrees : heh.
    • dkpandey agrees : this information is very usefull
    • Satva89 agrees : this post is really interesting and gives good details.
    • ishuverma agrees : yes i am agree this post
    • MMS Systems agrees : Nice
    • deepak27 agrees
    • emedianetwork agrees : Really great post for seo lovers..
    • moujlo22 agrees : thanks to all for share this great information
    • SBRTechnologies agrees
    • vibhav123 agrees : this is nice post for the on page seo..........
Page 1 of 5 123 ... Last
  • Jump to page:

Similar Threads

  1. Please explain different links?
    By cls in forum Link Development
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Sep 1st, 2005, 09:37 AM
  2. Outbound links list - advice help
    By jrothra in forum SEO Help (General Chat)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Jun 20th, 2005, 04:03 PM
  3. What kind of links does Google R-E-S-P-E-C-T
    By younglion in forum Google Optimization
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: Jun 18th, 2005, 06:37 AM
  4. anybody guide about msn page rank
    By primelibra in forum BING/Yahoo Search Optimization
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Jun 6th, 2004, 03:41 AM
  5. Hierarchical Structure or Not?
    By cyu in forum Search Engine Optimization
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: May 24th, 2004, 11:28 AM

IMN logo majestic logo threadwatch logo seochat tools logo