Re: No need for Google

On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 22:35:07 -0500, Carol W <from_you (AT) nomail (DOT) com>
wrote:

On 19 Mar 2006 11:44:42 -0800, "carlrs"
carl (AT) americanaquariumproducts (DOT) com> wrote:

Late response - and inspired in part due to similar thread on AWW:

[snip]

may consider is splitting those long achors/links into
multiple, but shorter worded, links to pages about those products.

*scrolls down a bit* Ah, I see now why you shared about that one
English Toffee place in your post. A little usenet/mirroring promo for
a link exchange partner.

Also, as a side note, the one site is using their site name as anchor
text -which is ok, if people search for that name. They may want to
rethink the anhor text used to point their way since their site name
and URL doesn't share hints about what kind of products they offer.
Your url, when split into stand alone words, have 1 or 2 keywords that
directly relates to the kind of products you are offering - so an edge
there that the other url does not have built into it when you think
about it.

Frankly, after reading this thread and the other one, I expected more
"meat" on the above two example URLs to back your argumentation of
"being overlooked" or "not ranking as well as should" thoughts in
terms of Google.

Out of curiosity: Do you really want (or expect) the main page to come
up for shell night light - or the inner/product page page that would
share more information about the shell night light?

Carol

On 27 Mar 2006 21:04:36 -0800, "carlrs"
<carl (AT) americanaquariumproducts (DOT) com> wrote:

Carol W wrote:

Out of curiosity: Do you really want (or expect) the main page to come
up for shell night light - or the inner/product page page that would
share more information about the shell night light?

Answer: An inner page

Ok, I just wanted to make sure since - on your earlier post - you
mentioned the search phrase and then the URL pointed to your main
page.

http://americanaquariumproducts.com/Shells.html or
http://americanaquariumproducts.com/...ghtLights.html

For future refernce: spiders, therefore SEs, see ShellNightLights as
1-word (shellnightlights) versus 3-words. The words may appear
highlighted in the search result pages ... but apparently the
consensus is highlighting doesn't always equal into "counted".
shell-night-lights is how some people would recommend in handling of
file names that are more than one word.

[snip]

As for the repeat of content and meta descript, I was told to keep the
them similar or the same so as to not be considered spam.
Of coarse I stand to be corrected here.

I have read, or heard, the same tip - only, on your page, you limited
yourself to just repeating and not adding/mixing in more content on
the page in with that repeated text. Surely, for the main page of a
site that is often used to share an introduction and other information
_about_ the site, you can think of more than 40-some words to
tantalize people, visiting that page, to click on the links to draw
them into your site.

Also consider that Yahoo, and sometimes Google, share part of the meta
descript in the snippet/abstract for an URL on the results page. Think
of how it would look to have word-for-word text appearing back-to-back
within that snippet/abstract ... and how that may appear to the
person's eyes that did the search query.

Now ..... after a debate with myself, over a cuppa, I am snipping the
rest as my response was getting huge - and I am trying to limit the
folks in this group to 1 huge 100+ line post from my side within a 24
hour period when possible - it's one of my new year's resolutions, and
dang -that's sometimes a hard resolution to keep! I will send a email
to the addie shared _in_ your post but it will be coming from a gmail
account, and sometimes - on Yahoo - those land in the bulk folder.
Just a FYI there for ya ... I will send it your way in a bit here, let
me savor another cuppa before writing it up for your leisure reading.

In terms of fees, you did know I would be considered part of the
humorously dubbed "bored housewives" sector of this NG, right?

Carol