Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
More SEO Content
Posted 28 December 2006 - 01:33 AM
I have a site, but in the home page there is very minimum content. Actually i am doing business with home theater and plasma TV. So, basically on the home page there are lots of image. So, please suggest me, is it possible to get rank without content on the home page.
Please help me out.
Posted 28 December 2006 - 01:41 AM
Google "SEO Flash"
Edited by jehochman, 28 December 2006 - 02:01 AM.
Posted 28 December 2006 - 03:42 AM
The pictures on your site under portfolio dont work. They wont enlarge.
Just thought you might like to know.
Posted 28 December 2006 - 06:41 AM
Rename the html Folder to something like "hometheatre".
Then optimise the HTML pages.
The potential returns to effort ration is hugely more than working with your Flash Content (swimming with boots on).
The HTML Pages need to link back to the Flash bits as appropriate to avoid creating a blind alley effect.
You need to use an appropriate Document Type Declaration.
Your HTML pages need restructuring with more text, Headings and HTML Title etc.
For example the HTML Title Tag is potentialy your highest scoring zone and your HTML Home page Title is "Home"
Other Titles are: "Our Products" & "Catalogue" etc . They need to convey products and services as are specific to each page.
The wayto score points that translate into position is to structure your "Document" as per W3C recomendations.
Title + Heading1 + Headings2 etc relating to the Text Content and it's flow.
Also you are missing Alt Tags for your Images.
In general, you need more text to get rated as a relevent answer to any search term. For example your Catalogue Page (index-3.html) has zero retrievable text (apart from Links Text) and no alt tags. Why not think of meaningful words to use as file names. Example instead of "index-3.html why not "plasma.html"
There are masses of gains to be made without spoiling the look of these HTML Pages. To achieve anything with your Flash section would require lots of work (framing + no-frames tag etc) with little gain.
Posted 28 December 2006 - 08:23 AM
You need to explain your visitors the added value of your products/services.
Posted 28 December 2006 - 10:43 PM
Why? What do you think that might do?
Huh? Score points with who? The W3C police? Search engines certainly don't care.
Yes, through link popularity. You better have THE BEST site in your field. You better spend the most money on advertising both on and off the internet, and have stuff no one else has to offer as well.
Posted 28 December 2006 - 10:52 PM
Posted 29 December 2006 - 05:45 AM
Rank is not all... you want to have visitors first, right ? so you should add some content and get a rank to help (only) to have visitors...
Posted 29 December 2006 - 08:56 AM
Including a word or words from your target Search Terms (sensibly chosen) in Folder and Filenames is beneficial providing it doesn't sink to multi hyphenated monstrosities.
Compliant code is very desirable for cross browser compatibility now and probably more importantly in the future. With so many Code Standards in use, the Document Type Declaration does what it says and tells the browser whic standard of code is in use. I am surprised you question the wisdom of using a DTD since YourHome Page uses
"<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">"
and this Forum uses
"<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR...nsitional.dtd"> "
When I referred to Points Scoring, I meant Search Engine performance being improved by the correct use of Document structuring such as:
HTML Title - reflecting the purpose of the Page.
H1 Tag - The relevent and representative visual "Title" of a page as early as possible after the Body Tag
H2 Tags for sub sections
Alt Tags to describe images
Do you dissagree ??
If a page is built to the correct structure and flow, with good and plentiful Text Copy, you are off to a good start IMHO but not in your oppinion apparently.
Posted 29 December 2006 - 09:53 AM
Of course that's a good start, but following W3C guidelines (or not) in and of themselves won't effect rankings. If the browser can read the info on the site, so can the engines and that's all they need.
Posted 29 December 2006 - 11:23 AM
Title + Heading1 + Headings2 etc "
This should have clearly conveyed document structure specificaly and not all W3C guidelines. After looking at the site in Question, this was a comment about Structure and the desirability of HTML Titles and H1s etc to be page specific. These definately do influence search engines.
The site in question does not have H1s, it has HTML Titles that are not appropriate, it lacks alt tags etc. These are all part of W3C document Stucture recomendations and all make a positive contribution to Search Engine Performance.
As for DTD, I was just pointing out good practice having noticed the site in question lacked DTDs.
Sounds like it's best for me to be a non-posting Lurker and only read posts.
Posted 29 December 2006 - 11:36 AM
Why? It's not a problem for us to disagree on this stuff. I think the readers here appreciate this kind of discussion, and it's certainly nothing personal. Not from here at least!
Posted 29 December 2006 - 11:45 AM
Just thought I had been jumped on a bit heavy for a First Post.
I don't mind mixing it as long as its not disrespectful and remains constructive.
Posted 29 December 2006 - 12:13 PM
On the other hand, have you actually tested much of the stuff you're mentioning as being beneficial to rankings Piskie? Some of us have and have spent literally years debunking myths that seem to gain their own life because they've been repeated so often.
Of the things you mentioned in your posts above, many have either very little or no effect whatsoever on rankings. Depending upon which engine you're talking about of course. The last time I tested some of these things the ones that had a no noticeable raniking effect include:
1. The DTD declaration.
2. Perfect W3C structure (eg <h1> followed by <h2> followed by... The order seems to make no difference.)
3. Alt Attributes of non-linked images. (Note: They're Alt Attributes of the img tag, not alt tags.) These will help with linked images, but not all images.
4. Keywords in folder or file names. Or domain names for that matter.
I'm not saying that one shouldn't at least attempt to create pages that meet the W3C standards. But to imply that following the W3C standards will gain someone a ranking benefit is simply incorrect. As long as the code isn't so bungled that the spiders can't read it, the standards mean little. For ranking purposes.
I'm sure if you tested the things you've mentioned, you'd find out the exact same thing.
Posted 29 December 2006 - 12:37 PM
It is merely good practice that an appropriate DTD along with compliant coding greatly assists cross browser stability.
I did not mention "Perfect W3C structure" but there is a core within that set of requirements that will assist SE performance.
Having looked at the site in question, and seeing no H1 tags, I think it relevent to point out that this is a requirement to get good rankings.
I stand by that.
Further, if sufficient Copy Text is used, then sub sections may be relevent and preceded by H2 Tags. Again this will improve rankings if done correctly and on relevence without KW Stuffing.
I stand by that.
Relevent words in the URL is more contentious but I believe that it is a positive factor providing it is used with restraint and not turned into a blatant KW Spamming exercise.
I stand by that as a belief rather than fact.
Descriptive words within an Alt Tag help Serps or not as the case may be and there are differing oppinions with proof and counterproof. However It is my contention that an accurate descriptive Alt Tag does help Google Image search. I have one site that features very heavily in Google Image Search with a significant number of vistors visiting the site in depth as a result.
I sometimes attack Image Searches as an objective with considerable success both in display position and commercial contributions.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users