Nick Stamoulis discusses what he thinks are the Top SEO Factors That Could Hurt Really Bad on his blog today.
This point I think is particularly true:
Quote: Changing Content: If you are hyper and you are always changing your content this is also bad for search engine optimization. You need to be able to let your web pages gain some age strength and if you are always changing your content you will not be able to take advantage of that age factor on your content. Tweaks and changes are ok but large sweeping rewrites are not going to help your long term goal of developing authority in the search engines. People change their content and don't wait long enough to see if the changes helped.
Read through the article then come back to discuss his points or maybe add your own. Thanks for your nice sharing.
Besides the point mentioned above, I also think having a well structured interlinking system would not only benefit the inner pages but also homepage and help a lot in increasing link popularity.
Thanks, I have different squeeze pages myself. I use a welcome page so people can choose which topic they are coming to my site for. Another for a product review page either one people have to make the decision to click and buy your services or products Quote: Originally Posted by etips I have different squeeze pages myself. I use a welcome page so people can choose which topic they are coming to my site for. Another for a product review page either one people have to make the decision to click and buy your services or products There is no guarantee a visitor is going to arrive at your home page therefore you need to have internal linking for them (and the search bots) to find your other pages. The matter of negative impacts of content changing can be really important, especially if someone changes all the titles of their web pages. I once did this and the rankings dropped considerably within hours and then by reversing the changes the normal ranks were gained again. Instead of changing any parts of the older contents and articles posted, the idea of writing new contents and then publishing them could be a better idea because fresh contents are always great, not merely modifying the older records. It is almost true. If we change the content on regular basis, then neither our site will get the advantage of that content nor our visitors will establish themselves with site's content.
Because, from caching, indexing and it's impact on Ranking or SERP, it is at least a week procedure.
Although i don't think that few changes, like keyword placement etc. make any negative impact. You are right dude ! Such effect can harm the ranking as well as traffic towards site. I think as a general rule, it makes more sense to continually add content instead of changing it. Aside from building links, it also helps to build a larger site for SEO purposes. Really changes are good but sometimes changing things very frequently can go wrong. So If you are currently updating your website every day and then decide to switch to updating it once a week, your scoring in the historical updating measurements at Google will probably shift. I'm not entirely convinced by any of the points.
Those of you who have seen sites break most of these rules and still rank well for fairly competitive keywords, please raise your hands.
I am surprised that some SEO experts still bang on about 'Excessive Javascript'. I've seen so many sites with truckloads of JavaScript in the head still doing very well on many a competitive keyword, while the poor guy who made the effort to link to all his JS code through nice, neat external .js pages still languishes somewhere in the ranking backwaters.
Let's face it, SEO is not an exact science. Some of this stuff will work some of the time. Quote: Originally Posted by HTMLBasicTutor Nick Stamoulis discusses what he thinks are the Top SEO Factors That Could Hurt Really Bad on his blog today.
This point I think is particularly true:
Quote: Changing Content: If you are hyper and you are always changing your content this is also bad for search engine optimization. You need to be able to let your web pages gain some age strength and if you are always changing your content you will not be able to take advantage of that age factor on your content. Tweaks and changes are ok but large sweeping rewrites are not going to help your long term goal of developing authority in the search engines. People change their content and don't wait long enough to see if the changes helped.
Read through the article then come back to discuss his points or maybe add your own. I think I finally found out the reason why one of the blog that I'm maintaining has lost its PR and keyword rank. Basically it is updated once every two days, and the homepage only shows one blog post. That's why the homepage changes frequently once I post another blog post. Guess I'll have to revamp the blog a bit to make some of the contents stay a bit in the homepage. this is basic info but its really effective on ranking I think the fifth bullet point shouldn't be
This point I think is particularly true:
Quote: Changing Content: If you are hyper and you are always changing your content this is also bad for search engine optimization. You need to be able to let your web pages gain some age strength and if you are always changing your content you will not be able to take advantage of that age factor on your content. Tweaks and changes are ok but large sweeping rewrites are not going to help your long term goal of developing authority in the search engines. People change their content and don't wait long enough to see if the changes helped.
Read through the article then come back to discuss his points or maybe add your own. Thanks for your nice sharing.
Besides the point mentioned above, I also think having a well structured interlinking system would not only benefit the inner pages but also homepage and help a lot in increasing link popularity.
Thanks, I have different squeeze pages myself. I use a welcome page so people can choose which topic they are coming to my site for. Another for a product review page either one people have to make the decision to click and buy your services or products Quote: Originally Posted by etips I have different squeeze pages myself. I use a welcome page so people can choose which topic they are coming to my site for. Another for a product review page either one people have to make the decision to click and buy your services or products There is no guarantee a visitor is going to arrive at your home page therefore you need to have internal linking for them (and the search bots) to find your other pages. The matter of negative impacts of content changing can be really important, especially if someone changes all the titles of their web pages. I once did this and the rankings dropped considerably within hours and then by reversing the changes the normal ranks were gained again. Instead of changing any parts of the older contents and articles posted, the idea of writing new contents and then publishing them could be a better idea because fresh contents are always great, not merely modifying the older records. It is almost true. If we change the content on regular basis, then neither our site will get the advantage of that content nor our visitors will establish themselves with site's content.
Because, from caching, indexing and it's impact on Ranking or SERP, it is at least a week procedure.
Although i don't think that few changes, like keyword placement etc. make any negative impact. You are right dude ! Such effect can harm the ranking as well as traffic towards site. I think as a general rule, it makes more sense to continually add content instead of changing it. Aside from building links, it also helps to build a larger site for SEO purposes. Really changes are good but sometimes changing things very frequently can go wrong. So If you are currently updating your website every day and then decide to switch to updating it once a week, your scoring in the historical updating measurements at Google will probably shift. I'm not entirely convinced by any of the points.
Those of you who have seen sites break most of these rules and still rank well for fairly competitive keywords, please raise your hands.
I am surprised that some SEO experts still bang on about 'Excessive Javascript'. I've seen so many sites with truckloads of JavaScript in the head still doing very well on many a competitive keyword, while the poor guy who made the effort to link to all his JS code through nice, neat external .js pages still languishes somewhere in the ranking backwaters.
Let's face it, SEO is not an exact science. Some of this stuff will work some of the time. Quote: Originally Posted by HTMLBasicTutor Nick Stamoulis discusses what he thinks are the Top SEO Factors That Could Hurt Really Bad on his blog today.
This point I think is particularly true:
Quote: Changing Content: If you are hyper and you are always changing your content this is also bad for search engine optimization. You need to be able to let your web pages gain some age strength and if you are always changing your content you will not be able to take advantage of that age factor on your content. Tweaks and changes are ok but large sweeping rewrites are not going to help your long term goal of developing authority in the search engines. People change their content and don't wait long enough to see if the changes helped.
Read through the article then come back to discuss his points or maybe add your own. I think I finally found out the reason why one of the blog that I'm maintaining has lost its PR and keyword rank. Basically it is updated once every two days, and the homepage only shows one blog post. That's why the homepage changes frequently once I post another blog post. Guess I'll have to revamp the blog a bit to make some of the contents stay a bit in the homepage. this is basic info but its really effective on ranking I think the fifth bullet point shouldn't be