Is the best page for indexing purposes, one that is constantly being updated, or one that stays the same? Example a home page of static links compared to a news site? Thanks.
actually it is also ok to use a dynamic pages, but really, being statics pages is much SE's Friendly. It is easy for SE's and much past. also, depends of the construction of your content.
Static is kind more SE friendly but... A home page with static links may get indexed once a week while a good news site can get crawled every hour/minute/second (if you're that big and popular). Since SE's like pages that are updated regularly...but it really depends on your niche and what you plan do do with your site. (I tend to prefer dynamic with pretty urls)
The best way is a STATIC page that you update regularly--adding rich content...Yeah..I know that stinks because you've got to a lot of work, but that is the MOST effective. Link to it with any one way indexed page. None will hurt--some may help for than others. Of primary importance is the anchor text. It should VARY and contain the keywords that you are targeting where possible. Best; Eric
Additional note-- Pretty urls are always nice. And--Updating OFTEN gets you the frequent indexing. Dynamic content isn't required--just frequent SMALL updates. Eric
You guys are killing me. Why in the world would Google care if the page is automagically created or a static HTML page? I do agree that SE friendly URLs are important - but how the page was created makes no difference. Or does it? I am interested in hear alternative reasons why - thanks!
The original question was about pages that change frequently like news websites vs pages that won't change very often of course google does not care about page technology... mypage.htm or mypage.php or mypage.asp if content is the same.
Sorry - I got off theme in my post. That is a good question. My experience has been good in terms of getting deeply crawled by Google in my stock market site - since every page in the site changes every single weekday. Google crawls my site constantly. My front page is a blog, so that changes everyday also. My experience might suggest that a dynamic site gives Google more reason to crawl deeply. Now - I am curious to hear other evidence to may counter my experience.
I am curious because my main site is currently a blogged home page but I am getting a new design for it which will allow me to key word optimize my home page a lot better, due to the information that will be on it being 100% related to key words that I am trying to rank for. Right now my key words are being lost due to there being so much text on my pages due to them updating so often, so with the static approach this will not be an issue.
Sorry lol. My homepage is a news blog, so there are hundreds of words on there that are not specifically targetted for my key word preferences. By going static, I can concentrate on loading up my home page with relevant key words.
Others can correct me if I am wrong, but wouldn't it be better to target inner pages for relevant keywords, rather than an uphill battle of targeting a general purpose front page? For instance, I don't target my front page at all - I am trying to get traffic to all my inner pages that are specific to certain stocks.
I think Matt Cutts commented on Dynamic VS Static Pages. They do both and neither is considered better although they do handle them each a little differently. YAHOO and MSN might not think the same way
The whole reason for me changing to a more static page is so that I can give more attention to my key words that I want to rank for. Right now they are gettting lost, but after my new site is done, they will be very prominant. I am still targetting inner pages as well, just allowing more key word optimization for my homepage.
We advise our clients to update their site frequently... luckily they have all (well almost all) taken our advice and put into place a system whereby a large portion of the index (root) page is updated on a daily basis. The reason is simple... most directories only allow index page listings... hence you need to get some juice to your homepage.
Interesting - I would say the opposite: Since directories only allow index page listings, you need to get more juice to your internal pages. Reason for that? Since directories are easy links to get - compared to internal links - use directories to get links to the front page. But, I would argue that the more valuable links will be highly targeted links to your internal pages.
regular static pages are good, but to above question i preffer dynamic pages rather then static site that dont update.