Family Business Website low Traffic

"Dan" <aloe4lifenet (AT) aol (DOT) com> wrote

Thanks, for the help. My intention was never to ram anything down
anybodies throat though. Also not sure what externalising the style
sheet means??? I used Macromedia Dreamweaver to design the pages so
have done no html code at all. (apart from meta tags). Compared to you
guys I am a novice, so go easy!

Dan,

there are plenty of sites out there explaining how to create and link to the
external CSS files in Dreamweaver. Just do a search for "CSS Dreamweaver
External Style Sheets"

'and in case you haven't as of yet, Why not visit the actual Dreamweaver
Forum?
When doing so, you're best off visiting it through Macromedia's (now Adobe)
site at:
http://www.macromedia.com/cfusion/we...cfm?forumid=12

There's plenty of helpful suggestions, links and explanations there and such
to help you on your way.
'best of luck.

--
LED
www.nyc-photo-gallery.com
NYC Photos and More!

Benjamin Niemann wrote:

Dan wrote:

Thanks, for the help. My intention was never to ram anything down
anybodies throat though. Also not sure what externalising the style
sheet means??? I used Macromedia Dreamweaver to design the pages so
have done no html code at all. (apart from meta tags). Compared to you
guys I am a novice, so go easy!

Well, you cannot expect to create high-quality code, if you don't know how
to do it. Tools like Dreamweaver don't do a good job here, if used as
WYSIWYG editors. And good, slim HTML code does effect your sites ranking to
a certain degree. Either learn how to write HTML or pay someone to build
your site.

I totally agree to the comments regarding the splash screen.

It looks as if your page should have a white background, but you did not
correctly set it. My browser defaults to a light grey.

Do not use images for the headlines and links. Use plain text and be sure to
wrap headlines in <h1>..</h1> (or h2 ... h6). If you insist on images
(though I can't imagine good reasons), set the ALT attribute to a
meaningful text.

--
Benjamin Niemann
Email: pink at odahoda dot de
WWW: http://www.odahoda.de/

Hi

sorry if my fellow web heads seem a bit impolite.

So, your site.

First, get rid of the flash intro as it doesn't add anything for your
readers or for your search engine ranking.

Second, revise your keywords and then write your text to match those
keywords. A useful tool that you may find helpful is
http://www.widexl.com/remote/search-...-analyzer.html

Third, replace as many images as you can with text. Its faster and the
search engine bots will find it easier to reference your site.

Fourth, build up a directory of links with sites that will link back to
you. Exchanging links is a great way to boost rankings.

Lastly, i would suggest you add more content in terms of text and info
stuffed with your keywords in the right places.

Good luck

YODA

Benjamin Niemann wrote:

Do not use images for the headlines and links. Use plain text and be sure to
wrap headlines in <h1>..</h1> (or h2 ... h6). If you insist on images
(though I can't imagine good reasons), set the ALT attribute to a
meaningful text.

What do you think about this kind of thing for headings?

http://www.wafisherinteractive.com/



--
Justin Koivisto, ZCE - justin (AT) koivi (DOT) com
http://koivi.com

<phil (AT) isham-research (DOT) co.uk> wrote

It also doesn't display well at 800 x 600.

Wow someone still uses that size?

"Stacey" <Remove-the-Y-stacey (AT) staceyssimplestuff (DOT) com> wrote

phil (AT) isham-research (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message
news:1138718234.680611.19850 (AT) g43g2000cwa (DOT) googlegroups.com...
It also doesn't display well at 800 x 600.

Wow someone still uses that size?

The Visually impaired?

Stacey wrote:

phil (AT) isham-research (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message
news:1138718234.680611.19850 (AT) g43g2000cwa (DOT) googlegroups.com...
It also doesn't display well at 800 x 600.

Wow someone still uses that size?

I noticed last night [ before I left for the Nickelback show ], of
the 500K+ requests to my site (see sig) in the last two weeks, approx
20% of them do according to awstats...

--
Justin Koivisto, ZCE - justin (AT) koivi (DOT) com
http://koivi.com

"Justin Koivisto" <justin (AT) koivi (DOT) com> wrote

Stacey wrote:
phil (AT) isham-research (DOT) co.uk> wrote in message
news:1138718234.680611.19850 (AT) g43g2000cwa (DOT) googlegroups.com...
It also doesn't display well at 800 x 600.

Wow someone still uses that size?

I noticed last night [ before I left for the Nickelback show ], of
the 500K+ requests to my site (see sig) in the last two weeks, approx
20% of them do according to awstats...

Not very much huh? Give it another year.:-)

"Stacey" <Remove-the-Y-stacey (AT) staceyssimplestuff (DOT) com> kirjoitti
viestissä:droioe$4nh$03$1 (AT) news (DOT) t-online.com...

It also doesn't display well at 800 x 600.

Wow someone still uses that size?

Quite many still do, and not everyone browse fullscreen even if they would
have bigger resolution. So there is also people with bigger screen and they
do have smaller browser canvas size than 800x600.

"Wÿrm" <nomailstodragon (AT) north (DOT) invalid> wrote

"Stacey" <Remove-the-Y-stacey (AT) staceyssimplestuff (DOT) com> kirjoitti
viestissä:droioe$4nh$03$1 (AT) news (DOT) t-online.com...

It also doesn't display well at 800 x 600.

Wow someone still uses that size?

Quite many still do, and not everyone browse fullscreen even if they would
have bigger resolution. So there is also people with bigger screen and
they do have smaller browser canvas size than 800x600.

Not me. I hate that wasted space and I use all of it. I realize that some
folks use a smaller size even with larger screens, but I feel there are so
many like me that think why have a bigger screen if ya ain't going to use
it.:-)

Stacey

"Stacey" <Remove-the-Y-stacey (AT) staceyssimplestuff (DOT) com> kirjoitti
viestissä:droti2$a2s$01$1 (AT) news (DOT) t-online.com...

<snip>

Not me. I hate that wasted space and I use all of it. I realize that some
folks use a smaller size even with larger screens, but I feel there are so
many like me that think why have a bigger screen if ya ain't going to use
it.:-)

I tend to have lots of apps runnign same time, and none are fullscreen,
windows are placed certain ways that i can move between apps quickly by
clicking some visible part of their window etc. FireFox window seems to
be currently 883x654 IE (only use it to check out HTML works on it too)
window is about 680x500 etc.

So it's matter of way you use whole screen area, if one runs one application
at the time, fullscreen is ok, but if you have more apps running same time
then atleast I find it much nicer to not have full screens For similar
reason I like tabbed browser because I generally have lots of websites open
same time too. like now 26 tabs on FF. And I know I am not only one who
don't run things fullscreen most of the time.