Top 50 SEO, Tips, Tricks, and Suggestions

I do primarily web analytics, but here are some suggestions that I've used in doing SEO that have been very successful. Obviously this list is not complete, but it is a good start for those who are new to SEO, and should keep them busy for quite a while. The full list can be viewed at:

http://www.sonicko.com/blog/2007/04/12/top-50-seo-tips-tricks-and-suggestions/

Thanks!

 

Lots of info - I'd suggest adding an extra return after each item to make it easier to follow along ;-)

 

Thank you for that suggestion. I updated the post.

 

Great tips, now add 50 more

 

No problem. I'll expand it to 100 in my next revision to help out as well.

 

"14. Register your domain name for the maximum amount of time. This instills trust among the search engines that you don’t have a one year hosting plan and then you’re done. This is a cheap solution, and lets them know that you plan to be around for a long time"

Wow, I have never thought of that. However it makes perfect sense!
Lots of great info btw

 

nice and informative article there, certainly a bookmark page!
but then the underscore and hifen is a bit tough to chose, i personally like only letters in the url, why go for those symbols!

google likes hifens more than the underscore, as in blogger they accept the hifens in the url!

 

Thanks! I can't take credit for that one though. That was something I read from Danny Sullivan, who was having difficulty getting ranked initially in Google for his searchengineland site. He suggested that he was going to max out the domain name purchase time in order to instill trust among Google and the others that he was planning to be around for quite some time.

 

I would suggest registering for 2 years or more. Maximum is too extreme and doesn't make good financial sense for most people.

I have tested my own sites with short registrations (and they have been around a long time) and seen zero effect of longer registrations. Keeping in mind this in on existing sites that have been around for years. I do believe that one should always register a new site for at least 2 years.

There is a lot of speculation around this issue; and no one has offered a good answer as to "how long" is long enough. While I do believe there is a boost in Google's Alogrithum to register 2 years or longer I have seen no evidence this is true for anyone else. But who really knows besides the "insiders".

My point in highlighting this is that it may make sense for some people to register long term, but for others it doesn't make financial sense to throw all the money up front if your portfolio is large.

Spammers register for the shortest term possible - and usually with the cheapest domains possible .biz, .info.

Registering for 2 years is sufficient to say to the Search Engines that you are not a run of the mill (underfinanced) spammer as long as you are not registering .biz or .info's which are to be avoided by most. It's very seldom I come a across either that is worth a repeat visit.

 

Interesting. I'm mostly SEO but also am in charge of analytics. I'd love to network with more people who have the same two focuses. Just a tip for your site: I'd really like to see some names attached to the posts and company profile. There's nothing wrong with a small business having personality & a human element.

 

The article is good but some aspects are either wrong or incomplete.

For example that point about how many years you register the domain for is wrong since it doesn't matter much at all, then secondly I saw you hyping up links from .gov and .edu sites, and they are nothing special at all actually! Its just that they have high pageranks and get crawled often, just like any other high pagerank website.

There were a few more but I got to sort out some stuff now so cant talk about this right now, but hey still there are a lot of great tips over there! Great job

IT

 

From the google patent:

Kudos to the OP on a post well written!

 

1. Common sense says that Legitimate domains may also be registered for one year, so it doesn't make any sense to me that Google would make a website rank low just because the owner didn't have enough cash or motivation to renew it for a second year. Unless of course if you take Point #3 in consideration.

2. I have never seen it happen that when a domain is registered for long periods of time it'd benefit in its SEO, and not just me, many others would agree, including some people who have posted in this topic, and SEO experts would agree too.

3. I stand by my word, its never a factor unless if you have an extremely shady website going on with all kinds of spammy SEO techniques on it, Google might (there is a very low possibility) think of that factor before permanently banning the web site from the search engine results, which would never happen, since if you have a Spammy website, many other factors that would be taken into consideration for determining the site's legitimacy earlier than this factor you are talking about would gather enough reasons to ban the website even before this factor is taken into consideration.

4. There is no use of the word "illegitimate" anywhere in the whole patent application document other than the point you quoted and another point right below it, thus even if Google flags a domain as "illegitimate", there is no mention anywhere in the Patent application that it will be affected in the SERPs in any way. There isn't any mention of what they do to "illegitimate" domains. I know that this is not such a bright thing I am saying but since you quoted the PATENT APPLICATION, I thought I might as well.

5. I could show you many domains registered for one year ranking really great and better than domains registered for 10 years and working on the SEO for the same keywords.

Bottomline: The years a domain is registered for DOESN'T MATTER in SEO since MANY MANY domains are registered for just one year, so it would be foolishness on part of Google to take a factor such as this into consideration for SERP results and secondly, even if they did, it would be damn manipulative since people would then register spam domains for two years instead.

IT

 

Tell that to the patent.

 

I reg a .info domain and put a million dollar script on it. The first update it received a PR4. Than I sold. I am not sure if you think a domain should shoot from a PR0 to a PR6 - 8 within 3 months. But I am sure if I kept the domain I would have had it shoot to a PR6 - PR8 by the end of 12 months.

 

Not disputing it, I've had similar experiences.

But the facts are the facts are the facts. It's a factor mentioned in the google patent

It's one of the factors and may not carry as much weight as some other. But it's still there.

Illegitimacy isn't likely to be rewarded.

In response to your capitalization of "patent application", that and possibly matt cutt's blog are the 2 sources of definitive information. As opposed to speculation.

 

Okay, the Patent information is definitive information? There you go, there is no use of the word illegitimate anywhere neither is there any mention of what they do with illegitimate domains/websites like I said, so there is the patent for you.

Its a fact alright that the factor is mentioned in their patent, but it doesn't matter since it isn't used, and I am pretty damn sure about it, possibly Google doesn't even use that pattern any more to order SERPs, but thats just my view of thinking, but still I'd say that neither I or anyone I know has seen the effect of that factor anywhere. Period.

IT

 

"Your view of thinking" is speculation. The google patent application is definitive information. Period

And sophistry of the kind I've boldfaced in the quote of your post below would prompt envy from the corruptest politicians

 

How is that relevant to this topic? and please keep THESE speculations of yours to yourself seriously.

Now about the Patent, yes the stuff inside the patent is definitive information that the things are included in the Patent, and thats it? There is no proof that Google actually uses that factor SINCE there is no definitive proof to it, Google has patented a set of methods for their Search Engine algorithm, we dont know whether Google actually uses ALL of those methods, and we most definitely have no proof that Google actually uses the method you are highlighting here.

Which is because of the fact that it has not been proven, there has been no recorded occurence of the usage of that method for ordering the SERPs! there have been a heck lot of preludes to which that thing could have been used for, but no it HAS NOT happened yet, that factor has never been taken into taken into consideration, at least not in circumstances that were observed and recorded.

and THIS is not speculation, its the truth. So SINCE it has never happened, it doesn't yet exist, maybe all Google does is to label a site as maybe... "possibly illegit" and carries on with it and if the site does something wrong they levy slightly heavier punishment for them? That might be the only way something like this could actually work out and STILL there is no occurence of even this happening that I know of.

IT

IT

 

Self evident.

Your inexperience does not constitute lack of proof of the existence of the phenomenon, nor does it substantiate statements like "it never happened" as you have made above.