...

View Full Version : Search engine charge fee? Or metatags?



SpiritualStorms
10-21-2004, 03:48 AM
Are metatags still the way by which search engines pick up websites? Or like everything else, i will have to pay someone for me to be listed on all the search engines?

bradyj
10-21-2004, 04:11 AM
Don't pay, that's worthless. Submit your site to Google and yahoo, they have areas to submit, just do a search.

Build your website with clean semantic code (google is looking for heirarchy in your data), keywords are worthless now since so many junk sites tried to abuse it.

That will do most of the work, next is to get as many links or hits as you can -- maybe put the link in your signature here at codingforums and answer some questions *hint:)

]|V|[agnus
10-21-2004, 07:46 PM
I am getting all sorts of crazy referrals from Google, Yahoo, MSN and the like (mostly Google) for searches on topics which would no doubt return a plethora of resources.

I have never submitted my site to anything.

My keywords have nothing to do with the search terms I'm being found under.

Code quality and relevance(i.e. people linking to you) means more than much of the rest of that garbage nowadays, and this makes sense if you ask me.

If you're content is worthwhile and relevant, and your code is quality, you'll be doing plenty for your rankings with that alone.

SpiritualStorms
10-21-2004, 09:26 PM
So in essence, i really dont need metatags? You know, i have never used them. But i thought of wanting to. I was under the impression that they were needed for search engines, and the what not.

I guess i should make an image, or a gif what others can past into their codes?

]|V|[agnus
10-21-2004, 09:30 PM
No, they are not worthless. I think what Brady meant to imply is that the keywords one in particular is not as valuable as many think anymore. Description is still important because that's what Google grabs when it displays your site in its results. You can of course add any meta tags you want too. Many sites will do something like, <meta name="author" content="Author's Name Here" /> and things like that just to enrich the meta data, making it more descriptive and available to any services that might utilize it. Yeknow, maybe someday Google starts looking for an author meta tag, or maybe you'll use it for your own purposes, etc.

The main point Brady and I are trying to get across is 1) SEO programs are mostly bunk, so don't bother 2) Well-structured, semantic markup and relevant content will do much for you.

liorean
10-21-2004, 09:37 PM
Well, the three largest search engines, Yahoo!, MSN and Google, are no longer using the meta keywords as search words. However, at least Google give you a lower ranking if you ARE using keywords that don't relate to the page (page, not site, mind you) content than they give you if you have no meta keywords at all. So, keywords are good for some search engines (WebCrawler for instance) but may actually be harmful for your site's ranking in Google.

The meta description is on the other hand more useful.


Another rule with Google:
- The elements h1-3 and title are important. Any strong, em, dfn elements somewhat are important.
- Link text and title is very important, as well as the context around the link.
- The source order is VERY important. A site can radically improve it's rank by removing just a few hundreds of bytes from the head.
- Most important is, however, the inbound links.

bradyj
10-22-2004, 12:21 AM
They have it right, I was a bit loose on my terms.

As Magnus said, Meta Data can be very useful -- it's just keywords that are not as important as they once were and can be damaging if anything - as liorean pointed out.

On my website, I still use the following:


<meta name="Description" content="Print and Web Design for the digital age." />
<meta name="Author" content="Brady J. Frey" />
<meta name="copyright" content="2004, Brady J. Frey" />
<meta name="revised" content="Brady J. Frey, 8/22/2004" />
<meta name="Expires" content="never" />
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" />

]|V|[agnus
10-22-2004, 09:40 PM
Also worth noting:

I have discovered that the myth of "search-engine friendly URLs" is just that: a myth.

My blog is running WordPress with no rewriting of the URLs. So every entry is index.php?p=25 or something like that. As I said, I come up quite well on Google.

Perhaps my data is far from conclusive, but I've never seen hands down legitimate information corroborating the claim that URLs with query strings hurt your rankings anyway.

liorean
10-22-2004, 10:18 PM
In it's early days, google indexed only pages without a query string or with at most a single name/value pair. Astalavista and a few others just stripped off everything after the question mark, though. I don't think they do that today. There's still a point to using "search engine friendly" URLS, though, and that is that the distinct words in a URL are worth as much as those in a h1 or title tag - a lot. That is not the case for query strings.

mindlessLemming
10-23-2004, 01:33 AM
<meta name="Expires" content="never" />

I thought that means the search engines never need to come back because the content will never update...
I have my 'expires' meta set to a date in the past.
Clarification, anyone?


|V|[agnus']
I have discovered that the myth of "search-engine friendly URLs" is just that: a myth.


They're still people-friendly url's though. eg: site.com/2004/11/article-name/ provides a directory structure which advanced users can use to navigate your archives. More importantly, you can easily use it to navigate your archives.

bradyj
10-23-2004, 06:06 AM
I thought that means the search engines never need to come back because the content will never update...
I have my 'expires' meta set to a date in the past.
Clarification, anyone?


Hmmm, yes, that'd be good to know -- I was under the impression that by saying it never expires, they can continue to crawl my site!

liorean
10-24-2004, 12:18 PM
The Expires header tells search engine spiders, proxy servers etc. how long time they can expect the file to be current. If you enter 'never', that means that the file is never going to be updated, thus they can instead of downloadig it again just use their cache of it forever. If you on the other hand tell it a date in the past, they know that they have to download it again next time.

bradyj
10-24-2004, 09:16 PM
that would make sense then for a site such as a blog to date -- but for mine, never is just fine if I don't do any updates. Or put a date when I think the updates would be completed, and the fresh content would no longer be... fresh?

liorean
10-24-2004, 09:34 PM
Also note that HTTP headers overrules any equivalent meta tag. That means that you should use .htaccess or equivalent, or a server side processing language, to generate the reply if you are going to use anything other than the server default for document expiry.

SpiritualStorms
10-25-2004, 02:05 AM
You know liorean, you are an amazing person. All the little tid bits that you know, about this, and that, and the what not, is impressive

I dont know what you meant by:



Also note that HTTP headers overrules any equivalent meta tag. That means that you should use .htaccess or equivalent, or a server side processing language, to generate the reply if you are going to use anything other than the server default for document expiry.

I have no idea what an HTTP header is, and nor have i ever worked with an .htacccess file. All the same, your little gems of knowledge are greatly appreciated.

]|V|[agnus
10-25-2004, 06:47 AM
I understand that Andrew, but we're discussing search engine rankings, not people friendliness in fact. :thumbsup:

gsnedders
10-25-2004, 12:42 PM
You know liorean, you are an amazing person. All the little tid bits that you know, about this, and that, and the what not, is impressiveand people question why I get upset in the summer ;)

Things like DMOZ sometimes take into account the people friendliness... One of my friends is an editor ;)



EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum