Alleged Positive SEO Ranking Factors

admin — Wed, 24 Sep 2008 03:24:33 +0000

Alleged Positive ON-Site SEO Ranking Factors
Factor #.	POSITIVE ON-Site SEO Factors.	Brief Information.
1.	KEYWORDS.	Google patent – Topic extraction For keyword selection, try – Google Trends.
1-1.	Keyword in URL.	First word is best, second is second best, etc..
1-2.	Keyword in Domain name.	Same as in page-name-with-hyphens..
1-3.	Keywords – Header.	Keyword in Title tag – close to beginning Title tag 10 – 60 characters, no special characters..
2.	Keyword in Title tag.	.
2-1.	Keyword in Description meta tag.	Shows theme of web site – less than 200 chars. Google no longer “relies” upon this tag, but will often use it..
2-2.	Keyword in Keyword meta tag.	Shows theme – less than 10 words. Every word in this tag MUST appear somewhere in the body text. If not, it can be penalized for irrelevance. No single word should appear more than twice. If not, it may be considered spam. Google purportedly no longer uses this tag, but others do..
3.	Keywords – Body.	.
3-1.	Keyword density in body text.	5 – 20% – (all keywords/ total words) Some report topic sensitivity – the keyword spamming threshold % varies with the topic..
3-2.	Individual keyword density.	1 – 6% – (each keyword/ total words)..
3-3.	Keyword in H1, H2 and H3.	Use H(x) font style tags appropriately..
3-4.	Keyword font size.	Strong is treated the same as bold, italic is treated the same as emphasis..
3-5.	Keyword proximity (for 2+ keywords).	Directly adjacent is best..
3-6.	Keyword phrase order.	Does word order in the page match word order in the query? Try to anticipate query, and match word order..
3-7.	Keyword prominence (how early in page/tag) .	Can be important at top of page, in bold, in large font.
4.	Keywords – Other.	.
4-1.	Keyword in alt text.	Should describe graphic – Do NOT fill with spam (Was part of Google Florida OOP – tripped a threshold – may still be in effect to some degree as a red flag, when summed with all other on-page optimization – total page optimization score – TPOS)..
4-2.	Keyword in links to site pages (anchor text).	Links out anchor text use keyword?.
5.	NAVIGATION – INTERNAL LINKS.	.
5-1.	To internal pages- keywords?.	Link should contain keywords. The filename “linked to” should contain the keywords. Use hyphenated filenames, but not long ones – two or three hyphens only..
5-2.	All Internal links valid?.	Validate all links to all pages on site..
5-3.	Efficient – tree-like structure.	TRY FOR two clicks to any page – no page deeper than 4 clicks..
5-4.	Intra-site linking.	Appropriate links between lower-level pages..
6.	NAVIGATION – OUTGOING LINKS.	.
6-1.	To external pages- keywords?.	Google patent – Link only to good sites. Do not link to link farms. CAREFUL – Links can and do go bad, resulting in site demotion. Unfortunately, you must devote the time necessary to police your outgoing links – they are your responsibility..
6-2.	Outgoing link Anchor Text.	Google patent – Should be on topic, descriptive..
6-3.	Link stability over time.	Google patent – Avoid “Link Churn”..
6-4.	All External links valid?.	Validate all links periodically..
6-5.	Less than 100 links out total.	Google says limit to 100, but readily accepts 2-3 times that number. ref 2k.
7.	OTHER ON-Page Factors.	.
7-1.	Domain Name Extension (Top Level Domain – TLD).	.govsites seem to be the highest status .edusites seem to be given a high status .orgsites seem to be given a high status .comsites excel in encompassing all the spam/ crud sites, resulting in the need for the highest scrutiny/ action by Google. Perhaps one would do well with the new .info domain class.
7-2.	File Size.	Try not to exceed 100K page size (however, some subject matter, such as this page, requires larger file sizes). Smaller files are preferred <40K (lots of them)..
7-3.	Hyphens in URL .	Preferred method for indicating a space, where there can be no actual space One or two= excellent for separating keywords (i.e., pet-smart, pets-mart) Four or more= BAD, starts to look spammy Ten = Spammer for sure, demotion probable?.
7-4.	Freshness of Pages.	Google patent – Changes over time Newer the better – if news, retail or auction! Google likes fresh pages.
7-5.	Freshness – Amount of Content Change.	New pages – Ratio of old pages to new pages..
7-6.	Freshness of Links.	Google patent – May be good or bad Excellent for high-trust sites May not be so good for newer, low-trust sites..
7-7.	Frequency of Updates.	Frequent updates = frequent spidering = newer cache..
7-8.	Page Theming.	Page exhibit theme? General consistency?.
7-9.	Keyword stemming.	Stem, stems, stemmed, stemmer, stemming, stemmist, stemification..
7-10.	Applied Semantics.	Synonyms, CIRCA white paper .
7-11.	LSI.	Latent Semantic Indexing – Speculation, no proof yet.
7-12.	URL length.	Keep it minimized – use somewhat less than the 2,000 characters allowed by IE – less than 100 is good, less is even better..
8.	OTHER ON- SITE Factors.	.
8-1.	Site Size – Google likes big sites.	Larger sites are presumed to be better funded, better organized, better constructed, and therefore better sites. Google likes LARGE sites, for various reasons, not all positive. This has resulted in the advent of machine-generated 10,000-page spam sites – size for the sake of size. Google has caught on and dumped millions of pages, or made them supplemental..
8-2.	Site Age.	Google patent – Old is best. Old is Golden..
8-3.	Age of page vs. age of site.	Age of page vs. age of other pages on site Newer pages on an older site will get faster recognition..

Alleged POSITIVE OFF-Page SEO Google Ranking Factors (43)
Factor #	POSITIVE OFF-Page SEO Factors	Brief Note
INCOMING LINKS :
63	Page Rank	Based on the Number and Quality of links to you Google link reporting continues to display just a SMALL fraction of your actual backlinks, and they are NOT just greater than PR4 – they are mixed.
64	Total incoming links (“backlinks”)	Historically, FAST counted best (www.alltheweb.com). No more – Yahoo (parent) broke it. In Yahoo search, type in: linksite:www.domain-name.com linkdomain:www.domainname.com Try MSN - http://beta.search.msn.com Use link:www.domainname.com Current TYPICAL Backlink Reporting Ratios- Google – 30 links MSN – 1,000 links Yahoo – 3,000 links
65	Incoming links from high-ranking pages	In 2004, Google used to count (report) the links from all PR4+ pages that linked to you. In 2005-2006, Google reported only a small fraction of the links, in what seemed like an almost random manner. In Feb. 2007, Google markedly upgraded (increased) the number of links that they report.
66	Acceleration of link popularity (“. . . used to be a good thing” … Martha)	Google patent Link acquisition speed boost – speculative Too fast = artificial? Cause of -30 penalty? Sandbox penalty imposed if new site?
FOR EACH INCOMING LINK :
67	Page rank of the referring page	Based on the quality of links to you
68	Anchor text of inbound link to you	Contains keyword, key phrase? #1 result in SERP does NOT EVEN need to have the keyword(s) on the page, ANYWHERE!!! What does that tell you? (Enables Google-bombing- search for “miserable failure”)
69	Age of link	Google patent – Old = Good.
70	Frequency of change of anchor text	Google patent – Not good. Why would you do that?
71	Popularity of referring page	Popularity = desirability, respect
72	# of outgoing links on referrer page	Fewer is better – makes yours more important
73	Position of link on referrer page	Early in HTML is best
74	Keyword density on referring page	For search keyword(s)
75	HTML title of referrer page	Same subject/ theme?
76	Link from “Expert” site?	Google patent – Big time boost (Hilltop Algorithm) Recently reported to give a big boost !
77	Referrer page – Same theme	From the same or related theme? BETTER
78	Referrer page – Different theme	From different or unrelated theme? WORSE
79	Image map link?	Problematic?
80	Javascript link?	Problematic- attempt to hide link?
DIRECTORIES :
81	Site listed in DMOZ Directory? The “Secret Hand” DMOZ Issues 1. Legitimate sites CAN’T GET IN 2. No Accountability 3. Corrupt Editors 4. Competitive Sites Barred 5. Dirty Tricks Employed 6. Rude dmoz editors Flawed concept – communism doesn’t work Free editing? Nothing is free. DMOZ Sucks Discussions DMOZ Problems Discussions The Google Directory is produced by an unknown, ungoverned, unpoliced, ill-intentioned, retaliatory, monopoly enterprise, consisting of profiteering power-ego editors feathering their own nests – the ODP. AOL is making millions, and needs to police it’s run-amok entity. Enough already!	This is a tough one. Google’s directory comes STRAIGHT from the DMOZ directory. You should try to get into dmoz. But you can’t. Be careful whom you approach with the old spondulix - Formal DMOZ Bribe Instructions. It is almost impossible to get into DMOZ. Google needs to DO SOMETHING about populating its own directory with the skewed, incomplete, poorly determined results from the dysfunctional Open Directory Project – the ODP! Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely
82	DMOZ category?	Theme fit category? General or geographic category? Both are possible, and acceptable.
83	Site listed in Yahoo Directory?	Big boost – You can get in by paying $299 each year. Many swear it is worth it – many swear it isn’t.
84	Site listed in LookSmart Directory?	Boost? Another great vote for your site.
85	Site listed in inktomi?	Inktomi has been absorbed internally by Yahoo.
86	Site listed in other directories (About, etc.)	Directory listing boost (If other RESPECTED directories link to you, this must be positive.)
87	Expert site? (Hilltopor Condensed Hilltop)	Large-sized site, quality incoming links
88	Site Age – Old shows stability	Google patent Boost for long-established sites, new pages indexed easily The opposite of the sand box.
89	Site Age – Very New Boost	Temporary boost for very new sites – I estimate that this boost lasts from 1 week to 3 weeks – Yahoo does it too.
90	Site Directory – Tree Structure	Influences SERPs – logical, consistent, conventional
91	Site Mapand more site map	Complete – keywords in anchor text
92	Site Size	Previously, many pages preferred – conferred authority upon site, thus page. Bigger sites = better SERPs Now, fewer pages preferred, due to proliferation of computer-generated pages. Google has been dropping pages like crazy.
93	Site Theming	Site exhibit theme? Use many related terms? Have you used a keyword suggestion tool? A thesaurus?
PAGE METRICS – USER BEHAVIOR: Currently implemented through the Google tool bar?
94	Page traffic	Google patent – # of visitors, trend
95	Page Selection Rate – CTR	Google patent – How often is a page clicked on?
96	Time spent on page	Google patent – Relatively long time = indicates relevance hit
97	Did user Bookmark page?	Google patent – Bookmark = Good
98	Bookmark add/ removal frequency	Google patent – Recent = Good?
99	How they left, where they went	Back button, link clicked, etc.
SITE METRICS – USER BEHAVIOR : Currently implemented through the Google tool bar?
100	Site Traffic	Google patent – # of visitors, increasing trend = good
101	Referrer	Authoritative referrer?
102	Keyword	Keyword searches used to find you
103	Time spent on domain	Relatively long time = indicates relevance hit Add brownie points.
38 DOMAIN OWNER BEHAVIOR :
104	Domain Registration Time	Google patent – Domain Expiration Date Register for 5 years, Google knows you are serious. Register for 1 year, is it a throw-away domain?
105	Are associated sites legitimate?	Google patent – No spam, ownership, etc.

Top

Digital Creative Services, LLC, Web site design at San Jose, Milpitas, San Francisco Bay Area, California » google ranking SEO

Alleged Positive SEO Ranking Factors

Alleged Positive ON-Site SEO Ranking Factors