Logan
Joined: Aug 14, 2002
# Posts: 3749
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-22 20:56
Four months ago we compiled a list of the top dos and donts to consider when optimizing your site for ranking in Google.
Can you make any suggestions to improve this list? Has anything changed?
Top 5 Google To Dos and Donts Debate: Compiled List
DO'S
1) KEYWORDS:
Do research keywords and evaluate competition.
Do include keywords in Page Titles, inbound (external) links anchor text, and at the top of the page.
Do have an appropriate keyword word density of 5-10%
Do write title tags to include important keyword (phrases).
Do optimize text links as well as heading tags <h1>,<h2>.
Do try not to target more than 3 keyphrases per page.
2) CONTENT:
Do try to build the best content based on keywords and competitive research.
Do focus on building lots of quality content
Do use common sense and give your customers or surfers the most relevant content available.
3) CODE:
Do write valid, clean code. Get rid of things like useless font tags by using CSS, this will reduce the file size, give the engine only what it needs and speed browser loading.
Do focus on correct foundational website structure, navigation and coding.
Do remember to optimize internal/external link structure. (Text is factored into the algo while the contents of an image are not.)
Do build a search engine friendly site map.
Do integrate with the web, seeking links from directories, portals and quality websites of like theme.
4) ANALYSIS:
Do focus on analysis of product, business, target market & competitors.
Do constantly update your site, adding new content.
Do make sure to know your market and who you are trying to reach; what they like, dislike. That will help you to create a terrific Web site that intuitively leads your visitors to the tools/content/features they're already seeking.
5) TIME & EFFORT, Tid-Bits:
Do have patience ... lot's of patience! While you're waiting, track your competitor's performance on Google.
Do remember that no trick or secret will get you top position for an extended period of time without relevant content.
DONT'S
1) KEYWORDS:
Don't target 1 word keywords on your first try.
Don't target unqualified or unrealistic terms (online gambling).
Don't stuff keywords or use hidden text.
2) CONTENT:
Don't use splash pages or redirect pages.
Don't try to pump it up more than it is.
Don't buy, borrow, copy, or steal content from another Web site that is already indexed by Google. Write your own content. If you're not a content developer, hire one
3) CODE:
Don't crosslink a new site that has no other inbound links.
Don't hyperlink or create mirror sites.
Don't place any barriers between searchers and the search engines and your site.
Don't EVER copy anybody else's meta tags, copy or other elements.
Don't use hidden links in an attempt to pass pagerank from your home page to important pages on your site or on others' sites.
Don't participate in ANY commercial scheme designed to generate link popularity for your site.
4) ANALYSIS:
Don't use any ranking checking software to querry Google about your site's search engine rankings.
5) TIME & EFFORT, Tid-Bits:
Don't look at the PageRank in the toolbar
Don't make assumptions based only on what is happening with your site(s)
Don't sign with or continue to use an ISP that has bad downtime, research them well. A 404 crawl by Googlebot will cost you much more than you will save with a cheap ISP.
Don't stress
Don't expect instant results.
------------------------------------
My comments... in the Secrets thread recently Mike-Levin suggested "a linked-together sequence of pages can give an extra boost. But few people take the extra effort it takes to break long content into a sequence of pages, and link them together with appropriately named previous/next links. "
I think that might be a valid addition to our list. Do you have any suggestions/comments?
|
 |
philh
Joined: Sep 14, 2001
# Posts: 3050
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-22 21:06
Nice work
Reminds me of the old KISS thing
|
|
runboy27
Joined: Jan 02, 2002
# Posts: 154
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-22 21:42
"Don't look at the PageRank in the toolbar " ???
|
|
Logan
Joined: Aug 14, 2002
# Posts: 3749
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-22 23:48
Correct runboy27! Don't look at the toolbar. Better yet consider uninstalling it. Seriously! Go by quality/content - not the toolbar. It was not meant for seo use - and clearly is not accurate on too many occassions. It's a reference, but not a good one. This has been the case for 4+months and i think it applies even more now - since things haven't changed much regarding the accurate display of current pr.
|
|
runboy27
Joined: Jan 02, 2002
# Posts: 154
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-23 00:55
He he - I misunderstod. I thought you ment to check it somewhere else, like in the directory.
Yes, I agree PR is not all it is hyped up to be.
|
|
yellowwing
Joined: May 21, 2002
# Posts: 2526
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-23 14:57
Overall it looks like a fairly complete list. The Analysis phase is where I spend most of my time. I try to determine which keywords are possible without spending a fortune on paid links. Sometimes I get lucky and find good traffic keywords with little competition 
|
|
patrickh
Joined: Oct 05, 2001
# Posts: 2187
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-23 14:57
As far as Google Toolbar sending information to Google, why is that bad? The toolbar sends Google the url of page you are looking at, and Google returns the PageRank... how can you expect them to do that without communicating with eachother? If you think Google is concerned with tracking every single page Joe Schmoe is looking at and profiling them, I think you are terribly overestimating Googles resources.
Back on topic, I agree with Don't #5 in that obsessing over PageRank does little for you besides provide a headache. As long as you are in a desirable position and getting some good traffic, PageRank shouldn't be an issue.
|
|
Mike-Levin.com
Joined: Sep 27, 2000
# Posts: 1988
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-23 19:07
Logan, I think you have my tip covered when you say "Do remember to optimize internal/external link structure." Those sequentially linked-together pages I talk about are just one of the details of internal link structure.
|
|
Bry
Joined: Sep 30, 2003
# Posts: 207
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-23 20:02
Don't target 1 word keywords on your first try.
Don't crosslink a new site that has no other inbound links.
Why not?
|
|
philh
Joined: Sep 14, 2001
# Posts: 3050
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-23 22:42
Bry - welcome to SEF... 
Why not?... No reason - have a go...
If you need help - just ask...
|
|
Bry
Joined: Sep 30, 2003
# Posts: 207
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-27 19:46
So how did the 'don't crosslink' item get on this list? No one cares to elaborate?
|
|
Mike-Levin.com
Joined: Sep 27, 2000
# Posts: 1988
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-27 20:14
Bry, what Logan said is "don't crosslink a new site that has no other inbound links." The thing to focus on is "that has no other inbound links." If a site has no other inbound links, and is only linked to by other sites owned by the same person, then you are beginning to create an "abuse pattern". There are all sorts of funky cross-linked sites constructed, owned by the same person in an attempt to create artificial link popularity. One or two cross-linked sites shouldn't hurt. It's the heavily cross-linked "islands" of Websites that have the problem.
|
|
g1smd
Staff
Joined: Jul 28, 2002
# Posts: 10418
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-27 21:09
Yeah, and that Googlebot can detect such linking when as little as only 3 or 4 sites are involved, sometimes.
|
|
Bry
Joined: Sep 30, 2003
# Posts: 207
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-27 21:36
It makes absolutely no sense that cross-linked sites would be bad. A site is a site and a link is a link. If the content is relevant, Google should not care about who owns the site's being cross-linked. When you think about it, it's the same as having a one huge site, except you have several smaller sites. There's really no difference.
Where a penalty obviously should occur is if the sites are all duplicated content. That should be penalized to prevent spam. But the cross-linked, that seems to me to be what the Internet is all about... linking from site to site, to site, to site.
|
|
nickn0783
Joined: Mar 26, 2002
# Posts: 1371
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-28 15:11
DON'T focus ALL your efforts toward Google. 
I believe putting all your eggs in one basket will end in tears
|
|
jimdomains
Joined: Mar 16, 2002
# Posts: 211
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-28 17:33
"DON'T focus ALL your efforts toward Google.
I believe putting all your eggs in one basket will end in tears "
Yeah but - whats good for the Google is usually good for the Gander 
|
|
GetYourWeb
Joined: Oct 30, 2003
# Posts: 1
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-30 10:10
OK, I think I got the gist of the posts above.
However what about a web site designer like myself. I build sites with my link on the bottom of every page.
Does that mean I will be penelised for creating this link of sites all pointing to me and I point back at them?
That just does not make any sense to me.
Any comments on that?
Regards,
Dani
PS: Nice to find a place that is still free of "charge" and in the true old internet style.
|
|
Logan
Joined: Aug 14, 2002
# Posts: 3749
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-30 13:36
Welcome to Search Engine Forums Dani! You can thank Jim Wilson for that style you mention....
----
Does that mean I will be penelised for creating this link of sites all pointing to me and I point back at them?
----
If you've been doing this and have not had any problems with your client sites or your own up to this point, then I say don't change your process and continue on as normal.
I remember back in jan/feb/mar of this year google was striking people left and right with a 'penalty' pagerank zero (not the same as the current pagerank zero where there is no penalty) and at that time 'some' webmasters were encountering issues with new sites and cross linking as described. I haven't heard of an issue with it in many moons (i think they reverted a lot and toned down the algo) but at one point it was an issue. Doesn't seem to be anymore (at least as much) - have things changed regarding how aggressive google is with its identification of those 'manipulating' links to effect rankings? I think so if you compare now versus last february. is it just me, or does link text spam seem to be every where and there are no penalties. i think it is being filtered, an alternative to eliminate manipulating link spamming. So while your links at the bottom may not cause a problem, it is theoretically possible that they might not provide the same impact as other links because of filtering.
|
|
dpeddle
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 269
|
Posted: 2003-Oct-31 16:08
Hey everyone..... good list going.... i have a situation that is worrying me a bit. One of my clients is located in 9 countries....5 of those countries are english speaking and have the same site structure ie: same look and feel... similar nav structure... and various pages are duplicated (with the exception of a location based content changes).
So.... basically they have very similar sites but on separate country domains... .com .ca .co.uk .de .com.sg etc...
Also.. these domains link back to eachother in teo areas..... select a location...... as well as the contact section..(again.. select a location).
Will google penalize them? Personally.. it makes sense that one company should have the same look and feel across country borders.... and also that the content would be relatively similar.
Any thoughts? (also.. incase you are thinking ibm style... like for canada you would have ibm.com/ca/ I have talked to them about this and its a no go.
So far i haven't had any problems with attaining decent rankings for each of their sites.... but i am worried about upsetting the googlemeister.
|
|
Inbox
