16 replies to this topic

[ranch]

As far as I remember Jill's newsletter often stated that using keywords in file and directory names won't improve your rankings, or at least very, very little.

In the most recent issue (#68) though, the guest article by mr. Nielsen repeatedly says that this is an (important?) SEO-issue.

Designers can use the best keyword phrases when they create new pages and graphics files in order to derive the benefit of keyword-rich filenames.

Have things changed or didn't I see Jill's disclaimer?

For graphics files I would assume that the alt-tag plays a much more important role than the file name itself.

IMO the major benefit from using keywords in filenames/paths is that the url shown in the search results will look more appealing to humans compared to "nonsense" url's. That goes for domain names as well.

Henrik Ranch

[JamesW]

Henrik,

From a non-SEO point of view, I would imagine that if the actual URL contains keywords that the visitor is looking for (for example 'red-widgets.html'), and isn't over-played (buy-cheap-red-widgets-usa-delivery-free.html) then this can only be of use to you.

Personally, I often check the url name when searching so as to avoid irrelevant web pages.

Cheers,

James

[Jill]

Henrick,

There's the indirect benefit of having keyword rich file names, in that if people link to your page by it's url, you then have keywords in the hyperlink, which IS a ranking benefit.

I personally don't make much effort in naming files this way, however, as I don't believe that most people link to them by URL. There are exceptions, however.

Jill

[Scottie]

I don't think it hurts... I'm not sure it helps much.

Just don't overdo it.

www.domain.com/online-sales-blue-widgets-best-prices.html is probably a little overdone, for example.

[Jill]

Ya think?

J

[Ron Carnell]

As far as I remember Jill's newsletter often stated that using keywords in file and directory names won't improve your rankings, or at least very, very little.

There isn't ANYTHING that will improve your ranking more than just a little. It's all accumulative.

[ranch]

Hi Ron

There isn't ANYTHING that will improve your ranking more than just a little.

Now that's certainly not true. Changing your keywords in the title-tag, for instance, has a big impact on rankings.

But sure, things add up.

[Jill]

Not so big without keyword-rich copy to match!

J

[Ron Carnell]

Exactly, Jill.

As important as the Title tag has become (that's fairly recent, btw, and I'm betting it declines in importance by this time next year), it is still just one step among many. Even content-rich copy, while vital, may not be enough if taken in isolation.

It's very, very easy to optimize a site if all of your competition is stupid. But if you're going up against ten or twenty other sites that have the basics nailed to the wall, you need to go beyond the basics and pay attention to the little details. World class races are rarely won by seconds, but by fractions of a second.

[DanThies]

you're going up against ten or twenty other sites that have the basics nailed to the wall, you need to go beyond the basics and pay attention to the little details.

You can keep "optimizing" indefinitely, or you could stop screwing around on *your* site, and start working on getting it linked in with *other* sites. On the largest search engines, that makes a lot more difference than figuring out another meaningless place to stuff a keyword in.

[Mel]

I don't think it hurts... I'm not sure it helps much...

Hi Scottie
While we may never know how much or how little, I do agree that every little bit helps,and some times it only takes a small change to move from #7 up to #2 or #3.

As to whether or not such things are included in the 100 or so elements of the Google ranking algo, and if so how much weight do they have, we can perhaps get a few hints on some of these by looking at the original thesis manuscript which gave birth to Google and we can see that (among other things)

Hits found within a URL are considered fancy hits rather than plain hits
Google takes the trouble to record the precise position in which the first 4096 words are found on a page.

While there most likely have been additions and improvements over the years as originally concieved Google seems to think that words within a URL are different than other words, perhaps even more important.

[Mel]

Well said Dan;

A single good anchor text link will do you more good IMO than tweaking the onpage factors of an optimized page.

[Ron Carnell]

I don't see the two as mutually exclusive, Dan. On the contrary, I've found that screwing around on *my* site is a pretty good way to get those external links.

I've "asked" for exactly one link in the past five years, and that was five years ago when I submitted my first site to Yahoo. Every link acquired since then, from ODP to Looksmart to three or four additional listings in Yahoo, has come about without asking. Nor have I ever participated in a reciprocal link exchange, even when asked. Those who link to my sites do so because they seem to like the screwing around I do on my sites.

I'm certainly not suggesting that a link campaign is without merit. But I have to create directories and filenames, and using a keyword or two in the process is completely without cost and even provides benefits unrelated to SEO. I can't say the same of a link campaign, which is NEVER without cost and probably would rarely occur to most people were it not for Page Rank. Still, I see no reason why one should preclude the other. My whole point is that EVERYTHING is important. Think of it as holistic SEO, if you like.

I will keep optimizing indefinitely, Dan, because a static site is a dying site. And as long as the site keeps changing anyway, I'll keep paying attention to the little details.

[Jill]

Ron, I agree with pretty much everything you said here, except for this statement:

I can't say the same of a link campaign, which is NEVER without cost and probably would rarely occur to most people were it not for Page Rank.

I was doing linking campaigns (what I used to call "custom submittals") long before the phrase "link building" or PageRank were ever made up.

People DO surf links. Maybe not as much as they use to, but they do, and links can and do bring in traffic in their own right.

Jill

[DanThies]

People do surf links, but I'm with Ron all the way on one thing. A "linking campaign," if it's just link swaps from one "links page" to another, has a high cost to benefit ratio.

I will still maintain that there's a point at which "optimizing" becomes a waste of time, compared to developing content or plain old marketing/promotion.

Edited by DanThies, 31 August 2003 - 10:01 PM.