Search
Engine Optimization, or S.E.O.
by Seamus
Dolly
While it can be spelled a variety
of ways, agreement after that can be difficult.
It is a business to some, and understandably,
they extol their own theories.
However, search engine optimisation
doesn't have to be complicated beyond the reach of the average
site owner.
Its essence is to simply make your
page as spider friendly as possible, and having keyword,
search phrases, density somewhere close to the accepted
requirements of search engines.
Too high a density may be considered
"spamming", and is dependent to some degree on
the particular engine in question. The correct density is
one that will satisfy such an engine that the keywords,
phrases, are repeated often enough not to be incidental.
Logically, the word "false teeth" which is now
within the body text of this article should not cause a
search engine to believe that is what it is about. Remember,
we are not dealing with a human editor, and relevance must
be established with software, less sympathetic to context,
in its English meaning, as we are.
Search engines can have different
algorithms or indexing criteria.
S.E.O. must change as the indexing
criteria changes, so what is good today, may have to be
re-considered tomorrow.
The view of many is to make the site/page
easy to navigate, with respect to internal and external
links. Java script can present a problem for some engines,
and should perhaps be kept to a minimum. Some people will
tell you that raw HTML is simpler to "read", spider-wise.
Sure, it might be simpler, but javascript rich pages are
indexed none the less.
For anyone to guarantee that they
can get you to number one, is a little optimistic, as everyone
cannot practically or theoretically achieve such a goal.
Surely, anywhere on the first page
of matches would not be a bad thing. All of us don't necessarily
opt for the number one match, and those with any research
experience will "skim" through the descriptions,
to go some way in deciding the best match. Descriptions,
should you be favoured by an engine, may tip the balance
towards you.
Of course, this approach doesn't
represent all surfers, so variables will always exist.
To achieve number one for a spurious
or unusual term/word/phrase is relatively easy, and no great
boast. Like wise, for less unusual terms or keywords for
rare products or less competitive markets.
Little or no search engine optimisation
experience should be needed in such cases.
It is almost certainly true to say
that any advantage in the case of competitive keywords/markets,
is really where the benefits of search engine optimisation
come into play.
It is also true to say that where
searches are confined/focused or country specific, the task
is somewhat easier than if the search was "web-wide".
For example, if your product was rubber tyres and you only
delivered within your own country, then the web results
will have a less commercial benefit to you.
Of course, another variable would
be if your country produced unusually high numbers of rubber
tyres, in which case search engine optimisation would need
extra consideration and input.
Generally speaking though, any use
of the search engines may convince you that the major players
seem to dominate. However, it is not to say that they cannot
be toppled, so to speak. From an engines' relevance viewpoint,
these may or may not be "tightly themed", but
often have relevance, with respect to time. This is a bid
by the engines to return results appropriate with the time
we live in. The annals of history are not foremost on the
minds of surfers/researchers, and therefore updated content
carries some weight.
The events of history can be searched
more specifically, where that is the desire of the user.
An issue for some people is to be
indexed in the first place.
You can join the queue and wait,
or get indexed through a spidered link on a site that is
regularly indexed. One purpose of a spider/robot is to follow
links, and this also ties in with suggestions that javascripted
links may obstruct/slow down the spidering process.
A simple way to get such a link is
to contribute something/anything to the article directories.
In return for your "textual" input, a link via
your resource box can point to your domain.
It is generally agreed that spiders
like text, or more importantly, new text.
A sensible defence of such a claim
is that we don't especially want MATCHES for banners, images
or anything uninformative. Such images, like the annals
of history, can be searched specifically.
Another logical defence of such a
claim is that we really are living in the INFORMATION AGE,
and mediums to relay information are still predominately
verbal and textual, however delivered.
While it may be an overstatement
to say that Search Engine Optimisation is to webpages, as
Neural Linguistic Programming is to humans, it may not be
too ridiculous.
Remember
1.You are dealing with software that
is attempting to analyse like a human. It cannot do this
as readily as organic intelligence.
2.You are dealing with software,
familiar with abusive human strategies of deception, and
has in-built counter measures. There are humans behind the
software, wise to the will of cheats.
3.You must help it with your selected
keywords/search phrases, which you deem to relevant. Their
densities will determine relevance from a textual degree,
whatever about a “site-relevance” degree. Too
often is word spamming, and not enough is irrelevant. Anywhere
between two and five wouldn’t be too bad, and depends
on who you talk to, or indeed, listen to. Make more pages
instead of trying to fit every conceivable keyword into
one page. A lot of people do this at the beginning, which
is understandable as well, but the body text just won’t
make any sense and any visitor will get a headache as surely
as you will. Spare both parties.
4. Some engines insist on robot text,
and should probably be facilitated, even though some have
a commercial interest in their insistence. Robot text is
not difficult to learn or implement and the name of it,
should not be a deterrent.
5. Metatags are designed to assist
as well and are nothing to be feared, but favoured, should
you decide to use them.
6.You must get indexed, to bear any
optimised fruit. This should no longer be difficult either.
About the Author
Seamus Dolly is at www.CountControl.com
