____/ canadafred on Monday 02 July 2007 02:11 : \____
> On Jul 1, 4:15 pm, "Murray R. Van Luyn" <NOSPAM@NOSPAM> wrote:
>
>> Nice to hear from you. That was about the fastest newsgroup response I've
>> ever had. Thanks very much for the link you sent. The algorithm updates will
>> be interesting for me whenever my poor site gets into trouble. I'm down to
>> 6.5% of my pages in the primary index at the moment, and really can't think
>> what to do next. I had 110+ pages listed for a while, but then It all fell
>> to bits on me. Oh well, we'll just keep plodding along and wait to see what
>> the toolbar report says.
>
> Just a few things to consider, they may not neccessarily apply to be
> considered in your case. Just a couple of thoughts, that's all ...
>
> I would more concern myself with why the search engine has decreased
> the volume of accessible webpages; what is blocking a complete crawl?
> Has the site been demerited?
>
> Sounds like you are in the search engine results page's blues and
> afraid of getting bluer.
>
> What about new web pages; are they being added after a couple of
> months incubating in the search engine's colon? Do they become 0/10
> (white barred) instead of being greyed out?
>
> Look at your content again. Eliminate anything that is repetitive
> unneccessaringly. Examine your sentence structures; are they correct
> grammatically? Are there any spelling mistakes?
Does that truly affect SEO factors? Other than the ability to deter visitors
and never get IBLs, how would the content be truly evaluated. Excessive (and
exact) repetition being the exception here....
> What about the code; can the spider find unique content for each web
> page?
--
~~ Best of wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | < http://debian.org >
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine
|
|
