Should I revise chaotic content?

[Stacey]

Alt text isn't supposed to "describe what the image is about".

It's supposed to be displayed only when the image can't be shown. If the
image can't be shown, then the visitor probably doesn't care what the
image is about -- (s)he just wants an alternative way of accessing
whatever useful info was in the image.

And should kind of describe see these images from a Google page.
http://www.google.com/jobs/culture.html

Also, all programs use the alt text to descibe an icon and don't just say
icon.

Plus all printed matter such as, books, newspapers, documents, etc describe
photo images. And the photo will always be there for people to see. Why
should a web page be any different?

e.g. alt="Logo of the company name in big blue capital letters with white
horizontal stripes, such that the white strips blend into the white
background" is useless. alt="I.B.M." isn't.

No, you are getting the wrong idea. Yes, IBM is what is suppose to be on the
alt text. Not just logo.

 

[Big Bill]

Not really. We're both right.

The thing is, web sites get visitors from places beyond search engines -
such as printed-media urls, tv ads, brand recognition, whatever. If your
visitors come to your site via one of these routes, the look and feel is
infinitely more important than search engine profile. For most people, a
balance between the two should be found, but never *ever* at the cost of
usability, accessibility or functionality.

As a general rule, accessability goes out the window. Cruel world, I
know.

BB
www.kruse.co.uk
SEO you could cuddle. Probably..

 

[Big Bill]

message


If you're such an expert, why can't you come up on the front page of Google
for your own company name?
You're not in the first 100 results for either "Search Engine Optimization
Services" or "SEO Services".

Nor will he be. Nor am I. Nor are any number of deserving people in
any category. Google is broken. It has been for some time.
Don't you keep up?
I have to say it is really comical watching the more self-righteous
ignoramuses from alt.html come on to our turf and make complete fools
of themselves. Take your time, boys. Just getting comfortable here. I
I might send out for beer and pizza, watch the show with eats.

BB

I didn't go any further than that, but I can imagine that you're even
further down than that.

You're just another snake oil salesman and need to STFU.

-Karl

www.kruse.co.uk
SEO you could cuddle. Probably..

 

[Big Bill]

No. How do you back up this statement?

Google's various problems have been being discussed on and off for a
while. This is a recent take on the algo probs.

http://www.e-marketing-news.co.uk/Oct04/RichLinking.html

There's stuff knocking about as to why they may be rebuilding their
index from the ground up but since it's been cropping up for six
months or so I can't lay my hands on anything just now. It's theorised
that Google's database is full. There's currently a new Googlebot on
the block doing deep crawls like crazy. All in all they seem to be in
a bity of a mess and have done (my opinion, this) since immediately
after Florida when loads of serps had top rankers with zilch to do
with the search terms. Things have improved since then but Google is
no longer what it was.

BB


www.kruse.co.uk
SEO you could cuddle. Probably..

 

[Big Bill]

I knew I'd get the quote wrong

I have a DVD player and occasionally buy DVDs (watched Van Helsing
last night) does that count?

"It's alive, it's alive" (probably quoted wrong!).

David

I've not actually seen that but it looks like they've robbed the
graves of wrestling (particularly The Undertaker) and Buffy.

BB
www.kruse.co.uk
SEO you could cuddle. Probably..

 

[Big Bill]

Of which we still have not seen evidence.

-Karl

Try Google groups for info on Dave's Classic Literature sites and
their rankings, PR etc. Also you really have to grasp that Yahoo and
MSN are in many ways more important for SEO these days.

BB

www.kruse.co.uk
SEO you could cuddle. Probably..

 

[Big Bill]

Rubbish! Google indexes new content all the time.

Never said it didn't.

BB
www.kruse.co.uk
SEO you could cuddle. Probably..

 

[Stacey]

CATFIGHT!

Meow! LOL!! I do agree with her on some points. Because if a web site looks
horrible or real slow etc I will probably leave. But not necessarily for it
being ugly. You can't judge a book by it's cover...it is like
restaurants...I have found the best food in a dive!

BB

www.kruse.co.uk
SEO you could cuddle. Probably..

I like this sig Bill....are you saying you are just a cute teddy bear!

Stacey

 

[Big Bill]

Meow! LOL!! I do agree with her on some points. Because if a web site looks
horrible or real slow etc I will probably leave. But not necessarily for it
being ugly. You can't judge a book by it's cover...it is like
restaurants...I have found the best food in a dive!


I like this sig Bill....are you saying you are just a cute teddy bear!

Stacey

There's still talk of me doing some tv purely on the basis that I look
to many to be just the opposite. It seems I'm to be fitted with prism
glasses to give me some short-term relief from my double-vision so
I'll get some shots done then. I'm going to look like nothing on
Earth. I had a look at the Ugly agency's male big boy models and I
look like none of them so that means I'm individual.

BB

www.kruse.co.uk
SEO you could cuddle. Probably..

 

[Matthias Gutfeldt]

You've not read my other post where I pointed out the rather large
flaw in Google's algo, have you? Summing up, any new site has zip
chance of good serps in the most referred to source of info on the
planet. Zilcho. Nada. Nix.
You didn't know?

I think I must be misunderstanding something, because it sounds like
you're saying that you sell SEO although you know it won't change a thing.


Matthias

 

[Neal]

And should kind of describe see these images from a Google page.
http://www.google.com/jobs/culture.html

These alts do nothing, really. If you can see the image, only with IE will
the alt be available in a tooltip. (title is the correct attribute to set
that tooltip text.) If images aren't visible, here's what the visitor gets:

Here's a glimpse into a typical day in the life.
Welcome to the Google Team You'll be challenged daily Be sure to think
globally Take your best shot Get a warm reception Make yourself at home
Have a little lunch Enjoy team harmony Relax Work your magic Bask in warm
satisfaction Make Charlie proud to be your chef

What a mess.

Mind you, alt text CAN describe the image, it's not wrong if it does. But
it should always, always serve as a replacement for the image when the
image isn't going to be seen.

Also, all programs use the alt text to descibe an icon and don't just say
icon.

Hmm? Not sure what you're getting at here. If I use the Opera browser, if
I hover over an icon I see no alt text. If an image is a link, the alt
text will be clickable if the image is not rendered.

Plus all printed matter such as, books, newspapers, documents, etc
describe
photo images. And the photo will always be there for people to see.
Why
should a web page be any different?

You're confusing a caption with alt text. If you want the effect of a
blurb describing the content of the image, use title or add a caption.
Don't misuse alt for this purpose.

No, you are getting the wrong idea. Yes, IBM is what is suppose to be on
the
alt text. Not just logo.

I agree - if the image expresses a concrete concept, like the name of your
company, the alt text should be the concrete idea the image expresses. And
if the image expresses nothing concrete, the alt should probably be
nothing at all.

IBM logo: alt="IBM"
Picture of the front of the building: alt="Our business is located at 123
Sesame Street, in a beautiful modern building overlooking a pond and a
park."
Picture of a blue dot: alt=""

Now. this is "correct" use of alt. However, for SEO purposes, you also
need to consider keywords and work them into the alt text wherever
appropriate. But you should never put the cart before the horse. Always
begin with the idea that your alt text is what you want the user to read
if they cannot see the image, and then optimize that language. And always
use good keyword alt text on linked images.

 

[SEO Dave]

I'm not entirely sure how much weight we should give your advice given
that your website doesn't appear in the top 25 results in Google for:

search engine optimization services
"search engine optimization services"
search engine optimisation services
"search engine optimisation services"
search engine optimization services co uk
seo services
"seo services"
"seo services" uk

If you have created any new sites recently you would know Google is
taking forever to rank them for anything but easy SERPs. In my
experience it's taking 6 months to obtain even moderately difficult
SERPs and anything SEO related is difficult because 90% of the
competition know the basics of SEO.

The site in the sig is a few months old, so I wouldn't expect great
things by now even if Google had not changed (used to take about 3
months to see improvements).

Add to this I run tests on my sites. Currently testing how unrelated
site wide links affect SERPs and it's not looking good.

If you create a new site and add to it 25,000 links from unrelated
pages don't expect to do well in Google. Now a smaller number of
unrelated links are fine, I don't like to talk about filters, but it
looks like Google filters out site wide links IF the linking site has
nothing what so ever to do with the linked to site.

Site wide links from related sites seem fine as are smaller numbers of
links from unrelated pages. So it's about numbers, you add thousands
of links to a site you are probably doing it for SEO reasons, Google
doesn't like that. However if you own multiple sites about the same
sort of subject it's understandable you are going to link them
together and this type of linking will not trip any filters (I hate
calling it a filter!).

I do have an older site doing OK for SEO phrases. It's a difficult
sector and tends to be dominated by those who use their clients sites
for links, they link from the clients site to their site which I
wouldn't do since it doesn't help the clients site (actually it
damages the clients site).

David

 

[SEO Dave]

I've not actually seen that but it looks like they've robbed the
graves of wrestling (particularly The Undertaker) and Buffy.

Didn't make me think of Buffy or WWF wrestling other than a joke my
wife made that they could do with Buffy to sort out the vamps quicker


I like horror sci-fi films so it's the sort of film I watch a lot of.
A few interesting twists, like the werewolf transformations and how
Dracula must be killed. Also a couple of cool weapons, like the spinny
cutting things which are under used in the film.

If you like to see comedy in this type of film you'll like the first
fight scene with Mr Hyde. When Mr Hyde was in shot and talking made me
think of Fat Bastard from Austin Powers )

Tried not to give much away above, don't want to spoil it for anyone.

BB

David

 

[Big Bill]

I think I must be misunderstanding something, because it sounds like
you're saying that you sell SEO although you know it won't change a thing.


Matthias

It just won't change a thing on Google.

BB
www.kruse.co.uk
SEO you could cuddle. Probably..

 

[Karl Core]

On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 00:09:00 +0200, Matthias Gutfeldt


It just won't change a thing on Google.

Oh, well congratulations on providing a service that does nothing for the
client!
I guess it is better than owning a cigarette company. At least you aren't
slowly killing people.

Without fail, participants I've observed in usability tests will almost
always (90+%) will say "Go to Google" in response to the question "What
would you do if you can't find the information here?"
They do not say "Click around till I find it". They do NOT answer "Use the
site's search engine". They do NOT say "Go to a search engine". They do NOT
say "Go to Yahoo". They say "Go to Google".

-Karl

 

[Big Bill]

Oh, well congratulations on providing a service that does nothing for the
client!
I guess it is better than owning a cigarette company. At least you aren't
slowly killing people.

Without fail, participants I've observed in usability tests will almost
always (90+%) will say "Go to Google" in response to the question "What
would you do if you can't find the information here?"
They do not say "Click around till I find it". They do NOT answer "Use the
site's search engine". They do NOT say "Go to a search engine". They do NOT
say "Go to Yahoo". They say "Go to Google".

-Karl

And when they realise what's happening, they won't. I always explain
to clients these days that Google's a mess, why it is, and why they
shouldn't expect the results from it that they might reasonably have
done, say, around a year ago.

BB

www.kruse.co.uk
SEO you could cuddle. Probably..

 

[Toby Inkster]

Google is broken. It has been for some time.

Google is fine. I can always find what I need on it. You seem to be
misunderstanding Google's purpose -- finding stuff, not self-promotion.

 

[stoma]

The site in the sig is a few months old, so I wouldn't expect great
things by now even if Google had not changed (used to take about 3
months to see improvements).

It's worth pointing out again that Dave's site struggles to make the
*top 1000* even for the most obscure combinations of his keywords eg.

Keyword: "search engine optimization services" uk
URL Pattern: www.search-engine-optimization-services.co.uk
Position 735

Add to this I run tests on my sites. Currently testing how unrelated
site wide links affect SERPs and it's not looking good.

I don't believe this, Dave is actually learning!!! He's finally coming
to terms with what I told him two months ago, something he's been
abusing me for ever since. Giving yourself thousands of links all from
the same site won't help you, it'll just get you kicked into the
Sandbox.

Maybe one day he'll even figure out that it makes no difference
whether the sites are related in theme or not, it's just the sheer
number of links that counts. And that it's not just the links being
filtered, the whole site gets hammered for all its other serps at the
same time, unless they're supported by genuine external links.

But then he'll probably claim the discovery for himself, and then go
on to find a whole new way of getting himself banished from the serps.
No wonder whenever a thread gets cross-posted Dave gets a good
kicking.

-stoma

 

[stoma]

Try Google groups for info on Dave's Classic Literature sites and
their rankings, PR etc. Also you really have to grasp that Yahoo and
MSN are in many ways more important for SEO these days.

You could start off with a couple of his newer sites
www.charles-dickens.org and www.jules-verne.co.uk .
But you'll need www.googlerankings.com to help you dig deep enough.

As a taster:

Keyword: charles dickens edwin drood
URL Pattern: charles-dickens.org
Position 506.

Keyword: jules verne michel strogoff
URL Pattern: jules-verne.co.uk
Position 218


-stoma

 

[Stacey]

There's still talk of me doing some tv purely on the basis that I look
to many to be just the opposite. It seems I'm to be fitted with prism
glasses to give me some short-term relief from my double-vision so
I'll get some shots done then. I'm going to look like nothing on
Earth. I had a look at the Ugly agency's male big boy models and I
look like none of them so that means I'm individual.

That is just fine......you probably have a cuddly heart, and that is all
that counts! Like I said above, you can't judge a book by it's cover.

Stacey