How Do I improve me SEO

[scottybuzz]

At the moment im getting 1 hit from seo at the moment - not too impressive

this is ways i have been trying to improve it

Img alt text of models. - relevant
Picture file names are those of the models. - relevant
Page titles are those of the models. - relevant
Keywords - Ive done some but no real idea of what to put except names of the models.

Any other ones?

Check out my site http://www.foxyreviews.co.uk

[Jamdin]

You could play up the fact that your site has reviews of hot babes on your warning page with a paragraph or two. Just because you have a warning page doesn't mean that you can't use that to your advantage.

[docholly]

you could attend the SEO chat that happens every wednesday night at 11pm EST here at GG&J and is run by Bill.

[Halfdeck]

+ Your pages need more text.

E.g. "http://www.foxyreviews.co.uk/homepage.html" only has around 53 words. Try 200+

+ You need more unsolicited links.

+ madisonsummers.jpg will only pull in Google Image hits for "madisonsummers". Separate words in urls with dashes.

--

You only need 2 things for sweet Google traffic (I heard it on the grapevine):

1. Revolutionary website
2. Great marketing.

[scottybuzz]

What about page names, for example you said madisonsummers.jpg would need a hyphon.

but would brookeskye.html need to be brooke-skye.html?

[T Pat]

What about page names, for example you said madisonsummers.jpg would need a hyphon.

but would brookeskye.html need to be brooke-skye.html?

Google has 78,700 pages listed for the keyword "brookeskye"
and 1,530,000 for "brooke skye"
The answer to your ? is yes |headbang|
when in doubt check it out:D

[scottybuzz]

ok i change change the webpage file names to brooke-skye.html etc

i wouldnt have thought this would have mattered

[Halfdeck]

i wouldnt have thought this would have mattered

I was talking about your new images scotty. It's not worth renaming your old urls. In fact that would probably create a problem. You're right - url naming etc doesn't really matter, so no sweat.

[scottybuzz]

oh - so wait, i dont have to rename url names?

how about the titles?

[DangerDave]

As we have said here and in the SE forum MANY MANY MANY times.... be very careful who you take SE advice from and dont take what people say as 'gospel' or as 'fact', because most of the time they are just plain wrong.



+ madisonsummers.jpg will only pull in Google Image hits for "madisonsummers". Separate words in urls with dashes.

.. and where exactly is the evidence/proof for this statement??

It is my opinion that that statement is 100% wrong.



scottybuzz,

IMO you should ignore most of the advice in this thread and concentrate on finishing and improving your site.

A quality site that has good "content" will have much more benefit than putting a dash in a url or renaming images.! Focusing on minutia or over-optimising ths site now would be a waste of time and resources.

As stated this is an opinion... not a fact, or gospel, and it is your inalienable right to completely ignore me.. :D

DD

[Simon]

... it is your inalienable right to completely ignore me.
He forgot to add "...at your peril"

:D

[Useless]

He forgot to add "...at your peril"

:DI believe that when it comes to DD, "at your peril" is a given. |thumb

[scottybuzz]

hahaha where am i supposed to stand now?! lol

[Preacher]

hahaha where am i supposed to stand now?! lol
Build the site you want. Build it intelligently. Put good content on it, good text in it and poor all your heart into it.

Chasing one SEO theory or the next won't bring you any more success.

Oh and always listen to DD 'cause he scares the absolute crap out of me! |goodnight

[msanchez]

Oh and always listen to DD 'cause he scares the absolute crap out of me!

Preacher your not the only one scared shitless of Dave.

[T Pat]

ScotyBuzz adding lots of quality content is undoubtedly what you should concentrate on.

|bow| I highly respect Danger Dave’s opinion and fear his wrath even more, but I have to say personally I believe in using hyphens to help get your site listed (especially a new web site).

Here’s Matt Cutt’s take on hyphens
http://mattcutts.com/blog/guest-post-vanessa-fox-on-organic-site-review-session/

In my very limited SEO experience/knowledge, I know if I do a google search for tijuanawhores I get crap for results
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&c2coff=1&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&q=tijuanawhores&btnG=Search
it even says at the top of the page Did you mean: tijuana whores

when I do a google search for tijuana whores the planets in the universe seem to go back into their proper alignment and I get better results
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&c2coff=1&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&q=tijuana+whores&btnG=Search

damn I feel like I'm going to be run over by a truck or struck by lighting any second now|brick

[Halfdeck]

.. and where exactly is the evidence/proof for this statement??

It is my opinion that that statement is 100% wrong.

http://www.greenguysboard.com/board/showpost.php?p=285185&postcount=28

You're free to disagree, but I prefer you bring some facts on the table instead of just disagreeing with me Dave.

A quality site that has good "content" will have much more benefit than putting a dash in a url or renaming images.! Focusing on minutia or over-optimising ths site now would be a waste of time and resources.

You only need 2 things for sweet Google traffic (I heard it on the grapevine):

1. Revolutionary website
2. Great marketing.

I don't see how we're in disagreement there.

P.S. "I ain't scared of no ghosts..." :D

[Simon]

Pat - wow, there are only 100 or so search results for when someone forgets to hit the space key... man, I'd be all over that search phrase variant if I could use it.

|thumb

[Halfdeck]

.. and where exactly is the evidence/proof for this statement??


Here are two searches on Google Images targetting image files named "perfectmilfs-[xxx].jpg." If Google did actually parse urls, it shouldn't have any problem finding the images when I run a search for "perfect" and "milfs."

Here's a search for "perfectmilfs (http://images.google.com/images?q=site%3Anastyxvids.com%20perfectmilfs&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&sa=N&tab=wi)."

According to DangerDave, those images should also come up when I search for "perfect (http://images.google.com/images?svnum=10&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&q=site%3Anastyxvids.com+perfect&btnG=Search)" and "milfs (http://images.google.com/images?svnum=10&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&q=site%3Anastyxvids.com+milfs&btnG=Search)."

As TJ Pat also pointed out, Google made it clear their crawlers do not parse keywords in urls.

As we have said here and in the SE forum MANY MANY MANY times.... be very careful who you take SE advice from and dont take what people say as 'gospel' or as 'fact', because most of the time they are just plain wrong.


One example is Matt Cutts recently stating Google slightly favors <strong> over <bold> then having another Google engineer show him the actual code where its clear both elements carry the same exact weight. Another is Jill Whalen claiming PR doesn't matter, then doing an about face after Big Daddy.

Draw your own conclusions. Don't believe someone just because he/she is supposeduly an authority on Google or because you feel like you're about to be run over by a truck.

[DangerDave]

Halfdeck lets get something straight..... I said 'IN MY OPINION', at NO time did I say anything was fact.

I don't believe I have ever said anything that I have posted in regards to Google is fact.

My only disagreement is with people that post so called "facts" about Google when they could not possibly know the facts they are expounding, as they do not work for Google, and/or of no evidence to support that 'fact'


My point is that specific naming of individual images is unlikely to make any major difference to search results for the web or for images.

.. and there are many people that would offer the opinion that naming all your images for specific keyword on a page, could/would be 'over optimising' or 'spammy' in Googles eyes.


I have never EVER said I was an authority on Google, I don't call myself GoogleGuru or anything bullshit wanky name, and I dont ever tell people to do specific individual things to the pages or sites.(Unless I am directly asked by them to do so)

I post my "opinion" and almost without fail post the caveat that it 'is' and opinion and should be taken as such.

I have also never posted any 'facts' about Google except for the standards that I have been posting for many years.

Fact - Quality content(text)
Fact - Incoming links
Fact - Relevant links

.. and these are still true.


You are entitled to your opinion, and I am entitled to disagree.

DD

[plateman]

hey DD if your not to biz chasing spammers you should come to se chat tonight:D

I think with learning seo first you should contrate on goog basic site construction with good content and when you start to get se hits - read and attend se chats and try stuff...

asking on a board its hard to soak anything up and what one tells you may not work for you as differnt things work for differnt kinds of sites, time and back links is hard to replace with any kind of fancy seo that someone might tell you...

[plateman]

talking about image tags is the last thing that site needs, first it needs incoming revelant links from other sites and revelent surport sites built off of the root, trade links, and age, most sites under 3 years old G wont give you the time of day and yada yada yada

[Chop Smith]

hey DD if your not to biz chasing spammers you should come to se chat tonight
|haha |haha

I only trust SE info from Danger Dave, Linkster and the voodoo lady in the French Quarter.

[Bill]

Well, I was actually not going to have an SE chat tonight, I was planning on taking a vacation for a while and come back in a month with a slightly modified form of the chat.

But if you can get Dave to agree to come and talk I'd be happy to delay my vacation for a week.

[DangerDave]

Sorry, Plateman, Bill,

Can't make it tonight(this afternoon) - three shiny new PCs arrived here yesterday afternoon... so I am going to be tres the next few days ..

DD

[Halfdeck]

My only disagreement is with people that post so called "facts" about Google when they could not possibly know the facts they are expounding, as they do not work for Google, and/or of no evidence to support that 'fact'

DangerDave, I don't believe anything I read no matter who said it unless I see some kind of proof, even if he/she works for Google. That said, in this thread I made an attempt to qualify what I wrote with "I heard it on the grapevine." In other words, I'm not speaking from experience, so its not something I can confirm.

My point is that specific naming of individual images is unlikely to make any major difference to search results for the web or for images.

.. and there are many people that would offer the opinion that naming all your images for specific keyword on a page, could/would be 'over optimising' or 'spammy' in Googles eyes.


I advised scott not to rename his images and that URLs "doesn't really matter" because I also believe the amount of work people spend on on-page voodoo isn't worth inching up a couple of spots on page 10.

Still, I believe on-page optimization is more effective when ranking in Google Images than in the main index, simply becaue there are less ranking factors involved. For example, Google Images ignores anchor text. If Google doesn't use linkage data to figure out what images on a page are about, then it must rely more on on-page factors (i.e. keywords in h1, title, ALT, few words above/below an image, keywords in image url). That by itself should give much more weight to tweaks that usually have minimal effect when ranking in the main index.

The rest of what you wrote I completely agree with.

[plateman]

|haha |haha

I only trust SE info from Danger Dave, Linkster and the voodoo lady in the French Quarter.
I wasnt trying to be a smart ass...towards DD he knows me and knows I have high respect for him - I get around and seen dave nabbed a few drive by spammers scammers lately|thumb

[Chop Smith]

I wasnt trying to be a smart ass...towards DD he knows me and knows I have high respect for him - I get around and seen dave nabbed a few drive by spammers scammers lately|thumb

WTF? Is it a full moon? I never thought you were being a smart ass. And napping spammers does not have a damn thing to do with this thread. Sorry that the use of the smilies went over your head.

[plateman]

I may have took it wrong, as I thought your gesture was for disrespect to DD... sometimes its hard to think what someone is thinking when they post - were cool man just fire a few rounds over my way...|waves|

[scottybuzz]

ahhhhhhhhhhh

so seo isnt as clear-cut as I used to think it was. During this thread I read a little into in on wickipedia and yeh, noone know the true 100% way of getting to the top. I will read this thread through again carefully and try and absorb the knowledge that has been put in it.

But thanks all for the great info you have given me. I will try to disect it as good as possible.

[Chop Smith]

No rounds to be fired.

So you saw the emoticons but missed this:

I only trust SE info from Danger Dave, Linkster and the voodoo lady in the French Quarter.

To make it plain, I respect Danger Dave's and Linkster's opinion. The self proclaimed search engine gurus fall in the same category as the voodoo lady in New Orleans.

BTW, the voodoo lady is a rude bitch. She listens to jazz, has a staff and has no desire to help newbies.

[docholly]

The self proclaimed search engine gurus fall in the same category as the voodoo lady in New Orleans.

BTW, the voodoo lady is a rude bitch. She listens to jazz, has a staff and has no desire to help newbies.

dayam i thought she was speechless in Vegas.. |haha





PS. Dave is God but that is just my opinion. :D

PSS: linkster is hot |roses|

[plateman]

No rounds to be fired.

So you saw the emoticons but missed this:



To make it plain, I respect Danger Dave's and Linkster's opinion. The self proclaimed search engine gurus fall in the same category as the voodoo lady in New Orleans.
yup I agree 100% and not ashamed to say they both gave me some pointers, not step by step, then I took a step back and looked at some things and thought and then I would change all my pages, fuckin days worth of work and then watch and tweek...

as far as paying for a seo - cant afford it, I been doing research for 3 years now and can honestly say it has helped a bunch, does that mean I think I am a pro seo - NO but it does mean I dont have to pay for it... And thats money we can put in the bank... and IMO thats what a webmaster should be

oh and sorry I even quoted you about the big laughs, I should have know better

[T Pat]

the hell with search engines I want to learn more about this Voodoo Lady

[Tommy]

I heard a really good trick the other day

you install the google toolbar in your browser
with the online voting enabled

and then go to your website and constantly hit reload and press vote for this site


also remeber when you took your computer out of the box and it had that little microphone
well find the microphone
hook it up and then go to google.com

speak in to the microphone and say

please MR google. Link my site whatever.com

[Kinky]

also remeber when you took your computer out of the box and it had that little microphone
well find the microphone
hook it up and then go to google.com

speak in to the microphone and say

please MR google. Link my site whatever.com

fuck Tommy that is the fucking funniest joke a I have heard in a long fucking time |jester|

[Trev]

fuck Tommy that is the fucking funniest joke a I have heard in a long fucking time |jester|
Joke? You mean I wasted 2 hours looking for that damn microphone and...... ummm... I mean.... Yeah... that was funny |jester|



*kicks microphone under the desk*

[Simon]

<meta name="GooglePray" content="Google, please rate me high by keywords Foxy's Porn Reviews">

Make sure you have the tag in the head of your page before you try Tommy's microphone trick or Google will ignore your prayers.

[Halfdeck]

I heard a really good trick the other day

you install the google toolbar in your browser
with the online voting enabled

and then go to your website and constantly hit reload and press vote for this site


also remeber when you took your computer out of the box and it had that little microphone
well find the microphone
hook it up and then go to google.com

speak in to the microphone and say

please MR google. Link my site whatever.com

.. and where exactly is the evidence/proof for this statement??

|couch|

[scottybuzz]

yo guys. just like to give you all mad props. I got seo coming in as one of my main traffic sources, so big up yourselfs.

[virgohippy]

I see you're mising your index.html... might want to fix that. I'm sure the SE spiders miss having pages to read. |sad|

[Tommy]

.. and where exactly is the evidence/proof for this statement??

|couch|

trust me it works!!!!!!

you want proof

the day I posted that statement i went to google and spoke in to my microphone and nicly said

please MR google link my site Tommys Bookmarks under the keyword Pornstars


and look.... I am now on page 1 for pornstars

http://www.google.com/search?q=pornstars&hl=en&lr=&rls=DGUS%2CDGUS%3A2006-13%2CDGUS%3Aen

[Useless]

yo guys. just like to give you all mad props. I got seo coming in as one of my main traffic sources, so big up yourselfs.Could someone translate this for me? I never learned the ignoramus dialect.



Why didn't the terrorists go after MTV? |huh

[Preacher]

trust me it works!!!!!!

you want proof

the day I posted that statement i went to google and spoke in to my microphone and nicly said

please MR google link my site Tommys Bookmarks under the keyword Pornstars


and look.... I am now on page 1 for pornstars

http://www.google.com/search?q=pornstars&hl=en&lr=&rls=DGUS%2CDGUS%3A2006-13%2CDGUS%3Aen
It's on page 2 from here, maybe you should try speaking louder! |attention

[scottybuzz]

I see you're mising your index.html... might want to fix that. I'm sure the SE spiders miss having pages to read. |sad|

my sites down at the moment, can do jack |angry|
im shifting hosting to amsterdam

[DJilla]

IMHO
SEO is something you do AFTER you have some traffic to look at. SEO and best practices are often confused. To get to the SEO stage all you have to do is set up your pages in a basic particular format:

Descriptive title with, name, act, type, style, etc.
ex: "Asian Babe Gives Blowjob Video! Fucked Twice"

Copy and repeat title in Description meta. Add a few sentences of related descriptive text

Keyword your title, description, add a few more, be tight don't stuff

Repeat in a sentence as anchor tag some combination of the above in every text hyperlink.
ex: "Click to see pink Asian pussy and her far east porn lesbian sisters can be found here"

Write sales text several paragraphs with combinations of all above that actually make sense.

Alt tag your pics

That's pretty much the best you can do and will at least make you neutral (meaning not penalized) and relevant.

Still you could never expect to attract SE traffic by itself on this basis alone on almost any subject let alone porn.

You have to develop your own link relations by submitting to other WM's or adding a LL to your site and getting WM's to submit to you. It is this "page creation and new content" or link relationships the SEs pay attention to. The more active your pages the more recognition from SE's.

Also: http://www.foxyreviews.co.uk/home.html

index page?
fix for 800px
tighten up and add more text
your keywords

"foxyreviews foxy reviews foxyreviews.com solomodel review single girl"

What do any of these have to do with porn?

After you get some traffic going from your own hard work then you can look at patterns and adjust for SEO to fine tune page performance.

Good Luck
|thumb

[scottybuzz]

wow thanks dillaj, let me have a closer look at this

[spacemanspiff]

I read this thread until I got to this part and then stopped, so this may have already been posted, but you can take this as the gospel.

Fact - Quality content(text)
Fact - Incoming links
Fact - Relevant links

Here's who else said it.

http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=35769

I don't THINK urls or image names really matter much.