Site optimization

[Chad]

Actually, I think you're the one that is wrong, of course, or we wouldn't be debating it
Very few search engines give much weight at all to meta tags because they're "hidden" from the viewer and as such, prime for keyword spamming, abuse and misuse.

Now, I'm not saying meta tags are useless but since so many search engines basically ignore them, any tags you DO have should be very concise and VERY appropriate to your site's subject matter.

http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=2165061

[SkGold]

Originally Posted by Chad

http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=2165061

I actually prefer to look in the source, before I start listen what people talking about it. And all search engines (including Google, Yahoo, MSN) still recommend using meta tags. Here just one example from Yahoo! Search Content Quality Guidelines.

Pages Yahoo! Wants Included in its Index

• Original and unique content of genuine value
• Pages designed primarily for humans, with search engine considerations secondary
• Hyperlinks intended to help people find interesting, related content, when applicable
• Metadata (including title and description) that accurately describes the contents of a web page
• Good web design in general

In some small search engines you will not show up at all without using meta tags. So I absolutely agree with Maffo.

[Chad]

I think we're in agreement then. I do think meta tags are useful, just not VERY useful. Site content is much more important. Meta tags don't help much but you're right, small search engines might still use them.

[Chad]

Originally Posted by SkGold

I actually prefer to look in the source, before I start listen what people talking about it. And all search engines (including Google, Yahoo, MSN) still recommend using meta tags. Here just one example from Yahoo! Search Content Quality Guidelines.

You can't fairly say "all search engines" and only cite a single engine (Yahoo).

[Maffo]

Originally Posted by Chad

Now, I'm not saying meta tags are useless

Yes you are, thats exaclty what you put, in the previous post. "Theyre Useless". And I also dont think that anybody is any kind of agreement with you like you have stated. This is clearly a field you dont understand. The results I posted on the previous page are from google. This website has hardly any site content. It has no incoming recipricol links. All link tags, meta-data, alt-tags, page titles are dynamically generated. Please can you explain to me how this site is getting the 80000 hits through search engines for 26000 different search phrases.

I would end this now if I were you as you are clearly making a fool of yourself.

[Chad]

Ok then I'll rephrase it. They're MOSTLY useless.

THIS site (the forum) is getting hits because of the content in the pages. The main site, 68classifieds.com DOESN'T EVEN HAVE META TAGS!!!! It is getting hits through search engines because the admins buy google ad words. lmao, not because of meta tags.

July 2002, Altavista, the last major search engine to use Meta Tags stopped including them in search criteria.
Google does not use Meta Tags AT ALL.

The Director of Research at Google, Monika Henziger (in 2002):

Currently we don't trust metadata

--(Journal of Internet Cataloging, Volume 5(1), 2002).

Just because you're on the internet doesn't make you an expert. I think you've made your point clear that you firmly believe meta tags are all important and I have attempted to counter that point effectively. However, telling me I'm making a fool of myself is kin to a personal attack and really just brings your effectiveness down a notch, though I see by your tagline, this isn't news to you.

You worship your meta tags, I'll go with what I already know to be true. They are given little weight and shouldn't be the focus for SEO. I don't care what SEO expert you quote. The staff at the search engines know the truth of the Meta Tag. If you can bring one of them here to tell me the Meta Tag is key, I'll listen. Until then, you go polish up your tags.


I'm #3 on Google using search words that aren't in my tags. Explain that.

[Chad]

For more information from actual experts in the field, go to http://webhostingtalk.com and search for "META TAGS SEARCH ENGINE" and you'll be shocked to read that I'm right. Either way, if you want to use them as SEO or not, I don't care. *I* use them but I know they're almost useless. I really don't care to argue this point with you any further as I don't much like debating and prefer to just be happy and friendly to everyone and have the same back at me.

[Maffo]

If you read my post properly I was talking about the site that I originally put the stats up about, not this forum.

You place a quote stating "Currently we don't trust metadata" that is 4 years old?

Please can you explain to me what defines an expert? I myself have worked for two actual Search Engine companies. I have just completed a complete remake of a website for the British Government, they werent getting any hits. I told them I would need to completely remake the site, which I have and got it top of the search engines, without any sponsored links or recipricol links.

If two websites are exaclty the same, one has the meta data inserted, one doesnt , which will come higher?

Meta-tags are VITAL to giving your website the edge over your competition and if your so-called experts are telling you otherwise, well think what you want, I have no time for this no more.

[Chad]

I understand where you're coming from and I think I understand how you've been mis-informed but it remains the meta tags went out of fashion in the late 90's. And died officially in 2002 with Altavista.
Now to answer your question, and give you a little bit of a victory, if two websites are identical and one has meta KEYWORD tags and the other doesn't, it's theroretically possible that the one with tags will rank higher when searching for those specific keywords.

Let's not confuse meta data, which is perfectly valid, with keyword tags.

Maffo, just because we argue this topic doesn't mean I don't respect your skills as a developer so please don't take it personally.

[Maffo]

Im in no way aggressive amigo, I just find your statements a little confusing.

I just see no logic in any of your posts on this thread Im sorry. My first response was to your post that stated "metatags", not "keywords" were useless.

I am fully aware that the metatag<keywords> bears little if any significance to the ranking of a page. In general, as a safeguard, on a dynamic page I combine the title, description and the text of page and display the first thousand characters. It probably has no effect but it doesnt hurt to do it.

As far as all the other meta data is concerned, it is vital to be optimised. I optimise every fine little detail on all of my sites for subject matter and location. All dynamically

So lets leave this one here, theres no problem from me