Critique help with search engines

Hi,

I've always had the worst luck getting Google to spider my sites. I
have two sites. One in which I've given up on after over 5 years of
not having one single page listed at Google and a new one that Google
will spider a little. The funny thing is that I've always tried my
best to make an honest site that people would like. Maybe it's those
who play tricks with the search engine that get listed. I don't know,
but I won't stoop that low!

My question:
I have some great concerns about how the global link structure of a
site should be. I'm referring to the links that sites usually put on
the left side of the page. I have a software download site with 15
main directories. Example, let's say someone clicks on the Business
directory. This will take them to the Business directory, which will
display all of the 15 main top directories plus all of the Business
sub directories. Will that confuse the search engines? Normally,
sites such as DMOZ will only display the sub directories and the
parent directory.

This probably sounds confusing. Could someone please take a look at
my site and see if it's search engine friendly, especially Google
friendly?
http://www.softwarelab.us

Thanks,
Paul

"Paul" <softwarelabus (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote

Hi,

I've always had the worst luck getting Google to spider my sites. I
have two sites. One in which I've given up on after over 5 years of
not having one single page listed at Google and a new one that Google
will spider a little. The funny thing is that I've always tried my
best to make an honest site that people would like. Maybe it's those
who play tricks with the search engine that get listed. I don't know,
but I won't stoop that low!

The one you have given up on must be the one that the domain is for sale.

My question:
I have some great concerns about how the global link structure of a
site should be. I'm referring to the links that sites usually put on
the left side of the page. I have a software download site with 15
main directories. Example, let's say someone clicks on the Business
directory. This will take them to the Business directory, which will
display all of the 15 main top directories plus all of the Business
sub directories. Will that confuse the search engines? Normally,
sites such as DMOZ will only display the sub directories and the
parent directory.

This probably sounds confusing. Could someone please take a look at
my site and see if it's search engine friendly, especially Google
friendly?
http://www.softwarelab.us

You main problem is that you do not have inbound links to your site. You
aren't even listed in the DMOZ. You need links to get ranked and stay
indexed. I couldn't find that many links to your site.

Stacey

Stacey wrote:
You main problem is that you do not have inbound links to your site. You
aren't even listed in the DMOZ. You need links to get ranked and stay
indexed. I couldn't find that many links to your site.

Is that really an issue? I put together a new Web site recently
(it might have had one inbound link) and Google still had it in
the database within a week.

The searchability problems with http://www.softwarelab.us
include:

non-descriptive title (how many software download sites are out
there - what sets this one apart?)

lots of tables early on the page

explicit navigation instead of putting navigation in scripts

no headings

no CSS (can't hurt, might help)

I wonder if enclosing the whole page in a form might be a problem?
Perhaps Google weighs the contents of a form much less than actual
useful content?

Laurie Mann
Findable Sites
http://www.findablesites.com

Stacey wrote in
<n29lc.33978$NZ4.20767@lakeread05>

"Paul" <softwarelabus (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:99112d37.0405020746.45a635b9 (AT) posting (DOT) google.com...
Hi,

I've always had the worst luck getting Google to spider my sites. I
have two sites. One in which I've given up on after over 5 years of
not having one single page listed at Google and a new one that Google
will spider a little. The funny thing is that I've always tried my
best to make an honest site that people would like. Maybe it's those
who play tricks with the search engine that get listed. I don't
know, but I won't stoop that low!

The one you have given up on must be the one that the domain is for
sale.


My question:
I have some great concerns about how the global link structure of a
site should be. I'm referring to the links that sites usually put on
the left side of the page. I have a software download site with 15
main directories. Example, let's say someone clicks on the Business
directory. This will take them to the Business directory, which will
display all of the 15 main top directories plus all of the Business
sub directories. Will that confuse the search engines? Normally,
sites such as DMOZ will only display the sub directories and the
parent directory.

This probably sounds confusing. Could someone please take a look at
my site and see if it's search engine friendly, especially Google
friendly?
http://www.softwarelab.us



You main problem is that you do not have inbound links to your site.
You aren't even listed in the DMOZ. You need links to get ranked and
stay indexed. I couldn't find that many links to your site.

And you could ship some of that presentational mark-up off the page into a
css file - gets rid of the "noise" for the spiders.

--
PeterMcC
If you feel that any of the above is incorrect,
inappropriate or offensive in any way,
please ignore it and accept my apologies.

Laurie D. T. Mann wrote in
<_YedncZwa-xEuwjdRVn-jw (AT) adelphia (DOT) com>

Stacey wrote:
You main problem is that you do not have inbound links to your site.
You aren't even listed in the DMOZ. You need links to get ranked and
stay indexed. I couldn't find that many links to your site.

Is that really an issue? I put together a new Web site recently
(it might have had one inbound link) and Google still had it in
the database within a week.

The searchability problems with http://www.softwarelab.us
include:

non-descriptive title (how many software download sites are out
there - what sets this one apart?)

lots of tables early on the page

explicit navigation instead of putting navigation in scripts

no headings

no CSS (can't hurt, might help)

I wonder if enclosing the whole page in a form might be a
problem? Perhaps Google weighs the contents of a form much less than
actual useful content?

In full agreement apart from a concern about "explicit navigation instead of
putting navigation in scripts" - were you suggesting that the site
navigation should be implemented by means of JavaScript?

--
PeterMcC
If you feel that any of the above is incorrect,
inappropriate or offensive in any way,
please ignore it and accept my apologies.

PeterMcC wrote:
Laurie D. T. Mann wrote in
explicit navigation instead of putting navigation in scripts
In full agreement apart from a concern about "explicit navigation instead of
putting navigation in scripts" - were you suggesting that the site
navigation should be implemented by means of JavaScript?

Javascript or whatever.

Laurie D. T. Mann wrote in
<SvKdnY4wi8Y0sAjdRVn-uQ (AT) adelphia (DOT) com>

PeterMcC wrote:
Laurie D. T. Mann wrote in
explicit navigation instead of putting navigation in scripts
In full agreement apart from a concern about "explicit navigation
instead of putting navigation in scripts" - were you suggesting that
the site navigation should be implemented by means of JavaScript?

Javascript or whatever.

I'm still not convinced that I'm understanding you but, if you are saying
that the site navigation should be handled by client-side scripts, I'd have
to disagree. I'd have a number of concerns including general accessibility
issues, visitors with scripting turned off - generally estimated at around
10%-15% - and, perhaps most pertinently in this discussion, the SE bots
can't follow script links.

--
PeterMcC
If you feel that any of the above is incorrect,
inappropriate or offensive in any way,
please ignore it and accept my apologies.

PeterMcC wrote:
Laurie D. T. Mann wrote:
PeterMcC wrote:
Laurie D. T. Mann wrote:
explicit navigation instead of putting navigation in scripts
In full agreement apart from a concern about "explicit navigation
instead of putting navigation in scripts" - were you suggesting that
the site navigation should be implemented by means of JavaScript?
Javascript or whatever.
I'm still not convinced that I'm understanding you but, if you are saying
that the site navigation should be handled by client-side scripts, I'd have
to disagree. I'd have a number of concerns including general accessibility
issues, visitors with scripting turned off - generally estimated at around
10%-15% - and, perhaps most pertinently in this discussion, the SE bots
can't follow script links.

I use both JavaScript for navigation and a site map link on every single
page. The sitemap link is always near the top of each page, so if
someone has JavaScript turned off or has an accessibility issue, they
can always navigate around my site. For that matter, if search engine
spiders generally don't use JavaScript navigation, they, too, can get
around my sites pretty easily.


Laurie D. T. Mann
Findable Sites
http://www.findablesites.com

On Sun, 02 May 2004 13:19:36 -0400, "Laurie D. T. Mann"
<spamcatcher (AT) dpsinfo (DOT) com> wrote:

PeterMcC wrote:
Laurie D. T. Mann wrote in
explicit navigation instead of putting navigation in scripts
In full agreement apart from a concern about "explicit navigation instead of
putting navigation in scripts" - were you suggesting that the site
navigation should be implemented by means of JavaScript?

Javascript or whatever.

Bye then.

BB

"Laurie D. T. Mann" <spamcatcher (AT) dpsinfo (DOT) com> wrote

Stacey wrote:
You main problem is that you do not have inbound links to your site. You
aren't even listed in the DMOZ. You need links to get ranked and stay
indexed. I couldn't find that many links to your site.

Is that really an issue? I put together a new Web site recently
(it might have had one inbound link) and Google still had it in
the database within a week.

The searchability problems with http://www.softwarelab.us
include:

non-descriptive title (how many software download sites are out
there - what sets this one apart?)

lots of tables early on the page

explicit navigation instead of putting navigation in scripts

no headings

no CSS (can't hurt, might help)

I wonder if enclosing the whole page in a form might be a problem?
Perhaps Google weighs the contents of a form much less than actual
useful content?

Google will sometime index new sites a little higher at first. But you won't
stay there. Yes, headings, title , and other issues were a minor problem.
But the big issue is no links. CSS has nothing to do with indexing and
ranking well. You don't need CSS.

Stacey