#1
  1. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    30
    Rep Power
    10

    HTML, Wordpress, and SEO


    " . . . but generally you want the article pages to have their unique content as high as possible in the html-code . . . "

    I found the above snipet in this post: http://forums.seochat.com/seo-help-general-chat-16/which-wordpress-theme-for-best-seo-335665.html

    My first thought was that a Wordpress Theme that has a lot of HTML specific to the theme itself (as opposed to my own content) is potentially problematic if my original content is buried more towards the middle and bottom. Did I understand this correctly?
  2. #2
  3. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Adventurer (500 - 999 posts)

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Rotterdam, The Netherlands
    Posts
    992
    Rep Power
    331
    Originally Posted by Ted Von
    " . . . but generally you want the article pages to have their unique content as high as possible in the html-code . . . "

    I found the above snipet in this post: http://forums.seochat.com/seo-help-general-chat-16/which-wordpress-theme-for-best-seo-335665.html

    My first thought was that a Wordpress Theme that has a lot of HTML specific to the theme itself (as opposed to my own content) is potentially problematic if my original content is buried more towards the middle and bottom. Did I understand this correctly?
    Partly.

    For content stacking this:

    Code:
    <div>
    <div>
    <div>
    <h1>Article Title</h1>
    </div>
    </div>
    </div>
    is not (that much) worse than

    Code:
    <h1>Article Title</h1>
    The order is still the same.

    To check content stacking, view a page without styling (firefox -> view -> page style -> no style ). There you can see the original order of the code.

    If you do this with some websites you will find those that have a lot of muck at the top.

    Like:

    Code:
    <h1>Myblog</h1>
    
    <h2>Main Navigation</h2>
    <ul>
    100 lines of menu
    </ul>
    
    <div id="sidebar">
    100 lines of promotions and silly stuff
    </div>
    
    <h2>Category: Articles</h2>
    
    <div id="about the author">
    lorum ipsum
    </div>
    
    <h3>Article Title</h3>
    <p>
    Unique article with keywords and editorial links
    </p>
    With content stacking and style you could do something like this, and have it rendered exactly the same as above:

    Code:
    <a>Myblog</a>
    
    <skip to navigation>
    
    <h1>Article Title</h1>
    <p>
    Unique article with keywords and editorial links
    </p>
    
    <div id="about the author">
    lorum ipsum
    </div>
    
    <h2>Category Navigation: Articles</h2>
    
    <h2>Main Navigation</h2>
    <ul>
    100 lines of menu
    </ul>
    
    <div id="sidebar">
    100 lines of promotions and silly stuff
    </div>
    And yes burrying your content halfway down the code can be problematic, or rather you don't always maximize the ranking potential of unique good-quality articles. It is advisable to put the keyword rich content that matters for that page, as high as possible in the code order. The first 200-300 words of your pages in plaintext, should be unique, relevant or keywordspecific to that page (so it can perfectly be a keyword rich menu for some sites, it can better be the article itself for news or blogsites with many article pages)
    Last edited by Jesus Nofollow; Jun 26th, 2010 at 03:46 PM.

    Following these recommendations should increase the likelihood that your site will show up consistently in the search results.
  4. #3
  5. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    30
    Rep Power
    10
    Thanks!

    I have to say there are a lot of great people on this site sharing what they know. I'm sure I'm not the only newbie who appreciates your patience and help.
  6. #4
  7. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    India
    Posts
    34
    Rep Power
    9
    Originally Posted by Ted Von
    " . . . but generally you want the article pages to have their unique content as high as possible in the html-code . . . "

    I found the above snipet in this post: (URL address blocked: See forum rules)

    My first thought was that a Wordpress Theme that has a lot of HTML specific to the theme itself (as opposed to my own content) is potentially problematic if my original content is buried more towards the middle and bottom. Did I understand this correctly?
    Every wordpress template or html page needs to have
    <body> tag. From search engine view content closest to the mentioned tag is more important.

    So it would be better to have something like

    Code:
    <body>
    <h1>heading</h1>
    <p>content</p>
    then for example

    Code:
    <body>
    <div align=center>
    <table width="98%" border=0 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0><tr><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
      <table width="730" border="0" align="right" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
        <tr>
          <td width="20"><img src="(URL address blocked: See forum rules)" width="20" height="21" /></td>
          <td width="35" bgcolor="#CC3402">&nbsp;</td>
          <td width="675" valign="middle" bgcolor="#CC3402"><center><style type="text/css">
    ...
    -> then content
    ...
    Yet it is best to build your page according to needed specification if not possible to get content close to the top of the page.
  8. #5
  9. Poker Chick
    SEO Chat Good Citizen (1000 - 1499 posts)

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    @ Poker table behind a big stack
    Posts
    1,412
    Rep Power
    896
    Originally Posted by SEO Peace

    Code:
    <body>
    <div align=center>
    <table width="98%" border=0 cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0><tr><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
      <table width="730" border="0" align="right" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
        <tr>
          <td width="20"><img src="(URL address blocked: See forum rules)" width="20" height="21" /></td>
          <td width="35" bgcolor="#CC3402">&nbsp;</td>
          <td width="675" valign="middle" bgcolor="#CC3402"><center><style type="text/css">
    ...
    -> then content
    ...
    I hope you're not suggesting that one should design a site's layout using tables vs. CSS?
    Frankly, I wonder who Frank is and why he has his own adverb.
  10. #6
  11. Poker Chick
    SEO Chat Good Citizen (1000 - 1499 posts)

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    @ Poker table behind a big stack
    Posts
    1,412
    Rep Power
    896
    Originally Posted by Jesus Nofollow
    It is advisable to put the keyword rich content that matters for that page, as high as possible in the code order. The first 200-300 words of your pages in plaintext, should be unique, relevant or keywordspecific to that page (so it can perfectly be a keyword rich menu for some sites, it can better be the article itself for news or blogsites with many article pages)
    I don't know if I buy that keyword rich content needs to be at the top. I have 4500 word articles that get "keyword pulls" for SERP snippets all the way through the article, even the last paragraph.

    Also, are you saying that after 200-300 words you don't need unique and relevant content?
  12. #7
  13. No Profile Picture
    Contributing User
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    India
    Posts
    34
    Rep Power
    9
    Originally Posted by JBacchi
    I hope you're not suggesting that one should design a site's layout using tables vs. CSS?
    Certainly not, I only copied this forum source for example .
  14. #8
  15. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Adventurer (500 - 999 posts)

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Rotterdam, The Netherlands
    Posts
    992
    Rep Power
    331
    Originally Posted by JBacchi
    I don't know if I buy that keyword rich content needs to be at the top.
    There is a lot more focus and weight there then at the footer.

    This holds for all content: image alts, paragraphs and editorial links. You don't want to be the 120th link on a page, just as you don't want to save your keyword goodness for the 4000th word.

    I have 4500 word articles that get "keyword pulls" for SERP snippets all the way through the article, even the last paragraph.
    Sure, but with natural wiki-style writing, the important keywords are already in the article introduction. And certainly with large articles, you want that article to be higher up in the code. You can't really content stack inside an article, but you can content stack the article itself: If the article follows another 4500 words of menus, promotions, sidebars, search bars, abouts, related articles, notices and scrollers it wouldn't perform as well as it could be.. Look at the larger wikipedia articles. Perhaps you could say in a way that the introduction and table of contents are forms of contentstacking inside the article.
    Also, are you saying that after 200-300 words you don't need unique and relevant content?
    Absolutely not. More focus and weight doesn't mean the rest gets ignored.

    See it a bit in light of a pagetitle (not exactly the same, but the gist):
    - First words of title get a lot more weight
    - Google will still read longer titles and pull keywords from them, just not weigh them as much as the first keywords-pagetitles from the competition.

    Considering off-page and domain authority is the same. If I take your last paragraph and optimise a page for that (page title, content stacking), I'll bet you wont be happy with the ranking results.

    (It would be a little like, taking your last post in this thread and making a new thread about it: JBacchi's opinion about content stacking. With your quotes on the subject at the top of the page.
    Very likely such a thread would outperform this thread on searches for some keywords specific to your post here).

    Comments on this post

    • Keiros agrees
    Last edited by Jesus Nofollow; Jul 7th, 2010 at 08:29 AM.
  16. #9
  17. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Super Hero (2500 - 2999 posts)

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Hamilton, Canada
    Posts
    2,695
    Rep Power
    489
    Without getting into a war on this....IMHO....using a table or CSS to make a site is SEO campaign neutral.

    The google bot ignores both....ie there is NO advantage in using either over the other....

    You should use what you want to use and I do just that.....scripting i.e. asp or php or .NET fits in either nicely...so the choice is your own....

    Oh, CMS can often change somethings too....ie the choice you make as to which one you use and how it can "stitch" into the structure you pick...we wrote our own CMS so it works nicely in .asp or .php in either tables or CSS structured sites...

    Tables or CSS layouts are just tools. Ignore the apostles and their rants on either being 'better' -- just aint true. Use what you want....is the best advice....



    Jim
    Jim Rudnick
    MCSD
    Canadian SEO

    Twitter: @JVRudnick

    read. learn. hypothesize. test. analyze...then rank!

  18. #10
  19. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Adventurer (500 - 999 posts)

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Rotterdam, The Netherlands
    Posts
    992
    Rep Power
    331
    Originally Posted by JVRudnick
    Without getting into a war on this....IMHO Ignore the apostles and their rants on either being 'better' -- just aint true. Use what you want....is the best advice....
    It's a developer thing more than an SEO thing.

    In a larger project you usually have the roles of a:

    - Webdesigner
    - Webdeveloper
    - Marketeer
    - Project/Client Manager

    SEO is mostly a marketeer role, but ofcourse these roles blend.

    For a developer: If you use tables for anything but tabular data you are a very poor webdeveloper.

    Building standards-adhering websites is perfectly doable for even the most basic skilled developers, there are no excuses. Not when you get taken to court because your website is inaccessible in a jurisdiction where that is illegal, not when a commercial activity is nulled because the policies where inaccessible in a javascript pop-up window.

    I can pull lots of official and expert sources that posit that using tables for anything but tabular data is the wrong way of doing things.

    Poor development shouldn't come from the developers, but also shouldn't come from the managers, designers or marketeer SEO's. If you as an SEO are styling websites with tables, you are assuming different roles. That isn't SEO what you are doing, you are doing someone elses job, and you are doing that job wrong.

    It might be neutral for SEO, but that opinion shouldn't make a mess of the job of the developer. It certainly isn't neutral for webdevelopment.

    I posit using tables for styling isn't neutral for SEO:

    Originally Posted by Google Guidelines
    # Check for broken links and correct HTML.
    Since you are using incorrect HTML according to the W3C (the authority on HTML).

    My view is that your opinion of "do whatever you feel like it" is counter to developing/SEOing a quality site.

    Ofcourse the bias from standards apostles leaks over into SEO. Heck, I even scan for W3C validation (and ofcourse broken links) in a SEO site health check-up rapport, eventhough that supposedly matters squat.

    If you take SEO as the marketeer role, what you would be doing if an ipod were a website was:

    Im gonna market the ipod, so I:
    - Build the ipod myself with faulty/low-quality wiring so the blind cant operate them
    - Compose some keyword rich tunes
    - Design the ipod myself
    - Dont really care for the marketstandard endproduct-quality of the design, content and development, do whatever u feel like.
    - Finally promote and market it.

    And if you only had the role of SEO marketeer, and plenty of designers, content writers, and developers at hand, you'd tell them: Don't listen to your marketstandard apostles, I don't care for the quality you are delivering.
    Last edited by Jesus Nofollow; Jul 7th, 2010 at 07:53 AM.
  20. #11
  21. Poker Chick
    SEO Chat Good Citizen (1000 - 1499 posts)

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    @ Poker table behind a big stack
    Posts
    1,412
    Rep Power
    896
    Originally Posted by JVRudnick
    ... there is NO advantage in using either over the other....
    If page load time becomes an SEO factor, and it may already have according to some, designing with tables adds to load times. Depending on the complexity of your page, using tables makes a difference. Overall, I agree tables vs. CSS is not a high priority for SEO. I think tables became so popular from slicing in Photoshop, but Photoshop now slices in CSS, so why not give yourself that extra load speed when it takes the same effort up front?

    Comments on this post

    • Keiros agrees
  22. #12
  23. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Super Hero (2500 - 2999 posts)

    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Hamilton, Canada
    Posts
    2,695
    Rep Power
    489
    gosh...and here I thought that these apostles didn't come here...

    nuff said. you all can do it your way...I'll do it mine.



    Jim

    PS this thread is in the SEO Help forum....not for web dev at all, eh....sigh....
  24. #13
  25. Contributing User
    SEO Chat Adventurer (500 - 999 posts)

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Rotterdam, The Netherlands
    Posts
    992
    Rep Power
    331
    Originally Posted by JVRudnick
    gosh...and here I thought that these apostles didn't come here...

    nuff said. you all can do it your way...I'll do it mine.



    Jim

    PS this thread is in the SEO Help forum....not for web dev at all, eh....sigh....
    Yikes, give it up Rudnick. I have lot more stronger words to engage your position, but I'll digress.

    You were the one bringing table styling into a discussion where it didn't fit in the first place.

    Just as you won't let your SEO be done all by a webdeveloper, you shouldn't let your webdevelopment get done by an SEO.

    You seem the only apostle here.
    - The one saying that abusing tables for layout doesn't matter at all for development or SEO.

    Styling content with tables isn't SEO. It's shoddy decade old webdevelopment and it has to go.

IMN logo majestic logo threadwatch logo seochat tools logo