What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How to Make Your PC as Fast as the Day You Bought It view!
howlifeworks.com - What's the fastest way to restore a computer to its original blazing glory
33 Comments
- danhuard, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6This is a great example of the type of personal blogs that DESERVE to be on digg.
Bravo! - ogletree, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2First off you can't compare a one word popular phrase like "mike" and his nonsense word. Google has different rules for popular terms and nonsense terms. For every example you give to prove some SEO technique I can show you ten examples why it is wrong. You are shooting at a moving target. They have at least 2 different algos that randomly shift around. They overhaul the algo at least twice a year. There are some general rules that everybody should follow but nothing on page is going to affect you much for a term that is that popular. It is all about links. How many links, the anchor text in the links, where are the links on the page, are they in a sentence or are they in a little box with lots of other keyword rich links, how many links show up at the same time, what type of site links to you, are the links from authority site. Matt Cutts gives some great insight into the way google looks at links on the last SEO rockstars.
http://www.webmasterradio.fm/episodes/index.php?showId=16 - djhifisi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Excellent, good dig. Have just gone though the same process myself. In exactly one month (26th Dec 2005 to 26th Jan 2006) I increased my ranking (of my name, egotistical I know...) from nowhere (5th page on Google) to the very top. #1 on the front page, and I have a VERY common name. Didn't use any H1 tags or anything tricky, simply changed my blog title to my full name and am lucky enough to have a popular blog. Was surprised as I checked (roughly weekly) how quickly google picked up the changes. Ps. sorry for the long post, I hate long posts...
- joehobbes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1From my experience the age of your domain is VERY important to Google. And its pretty hard to fake that. In fact they probably weigh that a bit too heavily. They routinely give better rankings to older sites even when they aren't nearly as relevant.
- thuss, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I find search engine optimization to be a bit of a black box with a lot of rough theories on the importance of using a title tag, h1, well formed HTML, etc... so I thought Mike's article was great because he put the concepts to the real test.
- headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1His test with the invalid table, test 3 I think, and the pages not appearing on Google at all probably doesn't have anything to do with Google "blackballing" the page, but more to do with the invalid tags breaking the pages DOM. If Google's page parsing software uses the document's DOM to do its work, and we can assume it does, then the invalid tag probably breaks it, so Google's software simply doesn't index the page.
- sentersoftech, on 03/02/2009, -0/+0been a pleasure to read... I agree with all of the above
- maverick3x6, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0not bad at all. I use some techniques that score well on most search engines.. of course using the tabless xhtml with plenty of h1, h2, etc... alt tags and title tags works great... and sometimes you have to useruse your keywords, but definately good article.
- sdm011, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I haven't read the article yet, but I give him a dig for the Mitch joke.
- isulongseoph, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Dugg!
http://isulong.seoph.org - senfo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Im high in google like number one under some key search terms so I call bull *****!"
Perhaps you could provide some insight? - LordofChaosIori, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Marvelous. Extremely interesting stuff. Google will rule the world in no time... maybe then we will be known as the United States of Google...maybe...just maybe...
- ytsebadd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Digg for the article...and for featuring Mitch Hedberg at the top of the link!
- mikeindustries, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0headzoo: I'm not saying this was a blackball at all... as in Google somehow looking down on invalid code. I'm just saying, this was an instance of badly malformed code not getting indexed properly. The fact that Google is considering the DOM at all is what is interesting to me here. They could easily be a lot more lenient in their regexes to compensate for my broken quote but they choose not to and I think that's smart because their results should always strive to be as close to what you see on screen as possible.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The most depressing thing about this whole article is that I own every CD Dream Theater has ever produced... (yes, even the really old ones pre-that-opera-like-singing-guy) ... and I think Mike Portnoy is a fantastic percussionist.
It's sad he had to get a drive-by bashing in the process of a pagerank analysis. I'm guessing he probably had his neice or nephew write his web page.
My wife, who hates Dream Theater is in the other room laughing at me. - Odo08, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I like Dream Theater, too. The second half of the "Images and Words" CD is actually stronger than their "hit", Pull Me Under.
- TextFairy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Why is his Google toolbar rank gray? Isn't that a bad thing?
- mikeindustries, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Sorry about the Mike Portnoy/Dream Theater dig. Meant it very lightheartedly. I'm sure Mike's a nice guy... his code just isn't very good.
- jhaven, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0very nicely done.
digg++; - skell, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Yes, an interesting read. Right up my alley. Thanks.
- ompalaster, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Good read... dugg.
- WeeklyGeek, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0great article, very enlightening.
- skytimelapse, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0not true headzo
- moosebumps, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Mitch Hedberg throwbacks get me veclempt every time.
- moondoggie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0a very entertaining read. dugg
- steppingrazor, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Well written. great digg.
- headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Thanks for explaining why you disagree.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0This is old news. Nothing new here. No Digg.... Everyone who follows SEO knows that tags help and thatlinks are important.
The biggest increase in rankings I've received has been when I added 20 pages of useful content. Look at the pages of content at the following URL, then type any of the page names (without the .php) into Google and see how it ranks.
http://www.presenternet.com/html/ism/business-communication-solutions.php - elroy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0a ripoff at half the price!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0by the way above 3,480,000 pages that are computer related!
- VipeNess, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0this is old news... there are many pages that list for seo, and how to completely design your site for this and google ranking, you can also buy ranking for your site too ;) thru ebay
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0Im high in google like number one under some key search terms so I call bull *****!
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is