Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
More SEO Content
Hit Or Hurt
Posted 18 December 2003 - 12:28 AM
I am newbie in search engine optimization and I have lots of queries and confusions. I feel some of tbe greatest SEO experts will help my doubts being clear in this forum.
I am focusing on many keyphrases but there are mainly three with the combination of 5 words A B C D E. These keyphares are 'A B C', 'B C D' and 'B C E'.
I have used all these words in my title bar, Meta and content of my website's pages. Besides this, in order to use them in URL, I took the following measures:
1. Created a directory with name 'A_D' in the root directory. Root directory now have only index.htm, images folder and A_D folder.
2. Changed the name of all the .htm files to B_C_E_X.htm. These files were having name x.htm originally.
3. Moved all the B_C_E_X.htm to A_D directory. Now I have the complete URL of all the files as /A_D/B_C_E_X.htm
My this website is newly born and Google has not indexed it till now. I am afraid, google do not consider this trick (i guess) as a spam and penalize my site.
Please tell that what I have done is the right way or I should get back to traditional trends of directory and filename structuring.
Posted 18 December 2003 - 02:12 AM
Your choices of files and directory names won't be considered tricks, but they also shouldn't effect your site's ranking at all. Giving weight to keywords in the URL would be an extremely poor metric for a search engine to use to determine the relevancy of a web page.
You'd be much better off picking a folder structure that's easy to maintain, then spending your extra time researching linking opportunities for the site. That will definitely improve your site's ranking.
Posted 18 December 2003 - 11:36 AM
Ed is right, of course, you could have a totally nonsensical directory structure and still rank number one because of content, etc. The reverse is not generally true.
Remember that there is also a line between keyword rich and keyword stuffing. Many people will not click on a URL that looks like pure spider food, but will click on on that looks like you've put aside a bunch of web space to talk about what they are interested in.
Is there a hard and fast rule? No. But if you (or better yet, someone else) looks at your directory structure and it appears to be organised, and just happens to be keyword rich, then you've done a good job. If it looks forced or silly, then you've crossed the line.
It's a bit of a judgement call, of course, but hopefully that helps. For example, there is no reason to have an directory called "for" or "older" except for spider food, so it's on the spammy side of things.
Edited by mcanerin, 18 December 2003 - 02:08 PM.
Posted 21 December 2003 - 06:39 AM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users