Google cant find my site
to...@tcca.co.uk
their (hahahah) faq's
still cant find me.
TC Car Audio www.tcca.co.uk
HELP!
John Bokma
> Have tried nearly everything to get googlebot to find my site, even
> their (hahahah) faq's
I doubt it. You really think that meta keyword spamming is what is going
to work? Maybe 10 years ago, but times have changed.
Focus on content and good mark up. Then try to get a few good incoming
links.
--
John Perl SEO tools: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
or have them custom made
Experienced (web) developer: http://castleamber.com/
Carol W
>Have tried nearly everything to get googlebot to find my site, even
>their (hahahah) faq's
>still cant find me.
How old is the site?
Do you have any links pointing your way from other sites?
Have the other search engines "found you"? I checked on Yahoo and
didn't see you (nor any links pointing yoru way) ... but didnt' check
out MSN.
In regard to what John said, you do have an odd-formed META keyords
listing with repetitions. Although META keywords do not help out that
much, if at all, with many search engines - the repetitions can still
raise a flag on their side. Example:
... , tc,
track, tc,
fader, tc,
RCA, tc,
optical, tc,
series, tc,
audio, tc, ...
Although you can go up to 600 or more characters for META keyword, why
bother ... especially if just repeating oneself and listing words NOT
on the page itself? You can do better, on places where META keywords
help out, by limiting yourself to around 12 to 15 keywords or up to
180 characters (including spaces) for that line - and having those
words appearing as part of the textual content of that page.
On the other hand, the META descript is short. Remember to change that
page by page also, like with the META keywords, versus using a
one-size-fits-all (same one across all pages) as out of the two METAs,
this one having more odds being shared as part of the abstract, or
snippet, in a search results listing. Particularly on Yahoo. It can
look kind of unenticing if seeing three or so pages lisited from the
same site but the META descript the bit displayed to "entice" a user
to click ... and instead deterring them from clicking due to the "same
thing said" for each page.
<META name="revisit-after" content="15 days"> <-- Remove, no sense in
advising to revisit as spiders have their own schedule and will visit
you on their schedule . Want them to visit more often, then get more
quality links to your site and then add new content.
<META name="robots" content="index, follow"> <-- Remove, not needed as
they will do that automaticall. If you don't want the spiders to index
or follow then use a robots.txt file
<META name="Robots" content="All"> <--- Remove, again - not needed as
you are just trying to stipulate normal behavior. If you didn't want
certain spiders/robots visiting then use a robots.txt file to inform
them of that.
img src="picts/spacer.gif" HEIGHT=3 WIDTH=10 alt="image" <-- change
the alt="image" to alt="" since the image is only used for spacing and
nothing else. Do likewise with all the other spacer images.
img src="picts/main.jpg" HEIGHT=100 WIDTH=750 alt="image" <-- change
the alt="image" to something else so it is holding meaningful text for
images that are relaying visual information to people. Yes, this can
help you out in more ways than one. Do likewise with all the other
meaningful images in your pages such as the ones used for linking.
Carol
Carol W
Postscript:
>img src="picts/spacer.gif" HEIGHT=3 WIDTH=10 alt="image" <-- change
>the alt="image" to alt="" since the image is only used for spacing and
>nothing else. Do likewise with all the other spacer images.
>
>img src="picts/main.jpg" HEIGHT=100 WIDTH=750 alt="image" <-- change
>the alt="image" to something else so it is holding meaningful text for
>images that are relaying visual information to people. Yes, this can
>help you out in more ways than one. Do likewise with all the other
>meaningful images in your pages such as the ones used for linking.
You may consider using text, versus images of text, for the
menu/navigation bar. If not, then follow the above advice about
replacing the alt="image" to alt="About TC Car Audio" or whatever
instead.
Carol
Borek
> img src="picts/spacer.gif" HEIGHT=3 WIDTH=10 alt="image" <-- change
> the alt="image" to alt="" since the image is only used for spacing and
> nothing else. Do likewise with all the other spacer images.
Or just remove alt="" at all. You will save on bandtwidth :)
Best,
Borek
--
http://www.chembuddy.com - chemical calculators for labs and education
BATE - program for pH calculations
CASC - Concentration and Solution Calculator
pH lectures - guide to hand pH calculation with examples
Els
> Or just remove alt="" at all. You will save on bandtwidth :)
Removing alt="" results in the word 'image' for every single
spacer.gif or decorative image in text only browsers. There is a
reason the alt attribute is mandatory according to the specs ;-)
--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
Roy Schestowitz
> Borek wrote:
>
>> Or just remove alt="" at all. You will save on bandtwidth :)
>
> Removing alt="" results in the word 'image' for every single
> spacer.gif or decorative image in text only browsers. There is a
> reason the alt attribute is mandatory according to the specs ;-)
Yes. It's good for SEO as it attracts traffic from Google Images. It's a type
of label/caption.
Roy
PS - It can also be helpful to blind people, but this is a search engine
newsgroup.
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Previous signature has been conceded
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
10:55am up 18 days 6:49, 4 users, load average: 0.01, 0.05, 0.07
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
Els
[alt attributes on images]
> PS - It can also be helpful to blind people, but this is a search engine
> newsgroup.
Making a site a good experience for blind people, helps SEO more than
you may think. Definitely worth talking about it in a search engine
newsgroup.
Example:
regular non-thinking webmaster's web page:
paragraph about birds
'read more'
paragraph about bees
'read more'
'read more' number one goes to a page about birds, 'read more' number
two goes to a page about bees.
This is probably made visibly logical to sighted viewers using IE or
Firefox. In the blind person's browser, when tabbing from link to
link, this person will only hear "read more", but he can't tell what
it is that he could read more about.
Now change 'read more' one to 'read more about birds' and 'read more'
two to 'read more about bees', and the blind person is helped, and so
is the SEO for the birds and bees pages.
tccaraudio
hopefully get there soon!
big thanks for the polite F.U. john, much appreciated.
Roy Schestowitz
Let's not neglect the value of the title attribute, which I always try to
incorporate as a surrogate for anchor text. Any invisible element does not
motivate the developer/author to embed it, whether it is abbr/acronym,
alt, title, meta or even doctype.
>Click here< is actually a common case study where the user, whether blind
or not, does not know where s/he is headed. Web design is impaired not on-
ly when it does not cater for the impaired, but also when principles of
standards-oriented design are poorly taught. I made many mistakes in the
past and only years later I come to realise that it deterred visitors as
well as search engines (hint: www.danielsorogon.com - 2001). I guess that
any design which makes /all/ visitors happy, will implicitly make search
engines happy as well.
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Far away from home, robots build people"
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
11:20am up 18 days 7:14, 4 users, load average: 0.27, 0.33, 0.26
Borek
>> Or just remove alt="" at all. You will save on bandtwidth :)
>
> Removing alt="" results in the word 'image' for every single
> spacer.gif or decorative image in text only browsers. There is a
> reason the alt attribute is mandatory according to the specs ;-)
The word 'image' will be not indexed at this moment, so it will
not hurt your SEO. It will not help either, but if the alt will
contain honest "spacer" it will have similar effect. I mean - zero.
As for other remarks (about SEO value and blind users) - they are
OK as long as we are talking about the images having some value in
terms of information or navigation. As long as the picture is only
a spacer it doesn't matter IMHO. Or rather my opinion is - don't
use images as spacers, use css to format page without using any
additional elements like spacers or tables. Then your alt attribute
can contain something meaningfull, not a garbage.
You can always use spacers to add alt="your keyword", but that's
out of scope of whitehat SEO :)