Navigation help and link exchange page

[Momo]

See, I have a multi-purpose site, so I can basically link to anywhere for now. It is just my personal site with many topics. However, I mostly focus on the photography section, and there, links are only related to photography. I am soon starting www.mosphotos.com, and there, all links will be in the same category, just like on your site, as you said.

For my site, I am getting a variety of keywords that bring(gave) a hit(s):

Palm tungsten t3 review, Pentax Lenses, Casio EDB-300 watch, motec. There are also many others.

Though all my site sections get visited, though, the most popular is the photography section, which has a great deal of content. (As I mentioned earlier)

[robinev]

Originally Posted by Momo

...if they really look for relevancy in the first place. They certainly find relevant links for their ads.

There's always that "if" when trying to figure out how a search engine does what it does.

You make a good point about AdWords. Google certainly has the technology to in place to identify likely subjects of a page. Whether they use that in any way for their indexing is one of the many great unknowns.

But if they are using it, it could explain why some folks became convinced -- despite evidence to the contrary -- that they devalue pages called "links.*". If they give greater value to relevant links, then a page of unrelated url's without other text could confuse the algorithms used to determine a page's subject.

But in any case, a good approach is always to think first about a site's visitors rather than making a site for search engines.

[Momo]

Yeah. I will focus on my content/design/navigation first, then worry about search engines. I am starting http://www.mosphotos.com, and am planning a better design. But the content is apprecieated, so I'm happy.

[Proteus]

Originally Posted by robinev

But in any case, a good approach is always to think first about a site's visitors rather than making a site for search engines.

That's the first command when you do a website. And I will always support that.

[Arne]

Originally Posted by Proteus

That's the first command when you do a website. And I will always support that.

There is nothing that exclude one of those just by thinking about the other. On the contary, what's good for search engines can be good also for visitors if you do it right. And the visitors need to find the site before they can be able to see it.

BTW, Happy New Year to you all!

[JWJ]

I have read much in this forum about targetting the right visitors, or creating content for search engines, and often the insinuation is that the two concepts are not compatible.

Just as a matter of general interest I'd like to throw in my own experience. My site is primarily watercolours and therefore is light on text and search engine content. I have done something about that recently and it is helping. However, I deliberatley expanded my site with trivia in an attempt to attract a larger audience. Now, I am intrigued to discover from my stats that some 45% of all visitors arrive by doing a search for 'ponderables'.

Sadly, a lot of them move on quite quickly, but a few browse into my watercolour pages, and those are visitors that I would not otherwise have had.

For what it's worth.

[robinev]

Originally Posted by Arne

There is nothing that exclude one of those just by thinking about the other. On the contary, what's good for search engines can be good also for visitors if you do it right.

Good point, Arne. But the problem comes with that "if you do it right" phrase.

I think I have a site that's good for our specialized visitors and it's certainly good for search engines if judged from its prominent place in SERPs (search engine report pages) for likely keywords. (And that placement is not accidental.)

But my point is still to think first about visitors. Build the content that will appeal to them and only then tweak pages for search engines. (That's an order of priority, but not necessarily the order in which things are done. For instance, a page's url is very important to some search engines. It's worthwhile to figure out a good one early on.) Tweak pages that exist for your visitors, but don't design a page mainly for the search engines.

It can be daunting for someone new to the process to keep a handle on all of the aspects of creating a good site. The fact is that most of the current search engines are so good at balancing their indexes that someone who had never heard of "search engine optimization" could still do well in searches. (Unless, of course, the site is selling V1agr4 or s0ft tabsof something or another.)

And happy New Year to all, especially the Aussies who are already in 2005.

[Arne]

Originally Posted by robinev

Good point, Arne. But the problem comes with that "if you do it right" phrase.

I don't see that as a big problem really. Just publishing content in HTML that is of interest for the visitors, is also of "interest" for the SE's! That is simply because it's the visitors who use the keewords, and that's what SE try to find! Just read John's own experience

One example how to do it the wrong way, is if you do it with flash only. Flash sites is fascinating for the visitors, but there is nothing for the SE's to find. SE's like Google can find flash sites, but that's very limited and only if the visitor especially search for *.swf files. Not even main pages on the Macromedia site are flash only

3 hours and 20 minutes left of this year!

[robinev]

Originally Posted by Arne

Just publishing content in HTML that is of interest for the visitors, is also of "interest" for the SE's!

Yes, as I said

"most of the current search engines are so good at balancing their indexes that someone who had never heard of "search engine optimization" could still do well in searches."

The priority should be the site's visitors since focusing on their needs will usually create content that can be indexed by the SEs. (Unless, as you say, the designer makes the too-common rookie mistake of overusing Flash.)

Learning about SEO is worthwhile for any site since a few tweaks can move a page's position on search results. But it should be a tweak to a page that exists for the sake of users.

[trackerm]

targetting the right visitors, or creating content for search engines,

My site is primarily watercolours .....I deliberatley expanded my site with trivia in an attempt to attract a larger audience.

Hi John

You have expanded into an area which go Against your target audience!
You website is about watercolours... that’s art. why would someone interested in art want to look at trivia? Unless its art trivia (of course).
I think you would be much better served by expanding into that will attract your target audience: art history, watercolour technique essays, watercolour galleries, famous watercolours, stolen famous water colours, local galleries, local exhibitions etc etc.


this way when someone, for example, googles 'Monet flowers' they may end up on your website.

Your links will be to other watercolour sites, forums, galleries etc.

All the best.

Mark