SEO for the beginner: FAQ + resources

[Rallen]

Fantastic article! I'm only now starting to educate myself on SEO and get our forum membership up, and this is incredibly helpful for a beginner!

Thanks!!

 

[brainjohn]

Great post and excellent for starters as well. Specially the links given for forums search are helpful.

 

[groshanfabiola]

What to do to improve my PageRank?

Get more links to your site! The more links you get, from pages with PR as high as possible, and with as less on-page links as possible, the higher your PR will get. Using the command link:www.yoursite.com in google will show you some of the sites linking to you (it is generally considered only sites with PR>=4 are listed).
You can get links to your site by submitting it to directories (see below), exchanging links with other webmasters, or by generally having a quality site and promoting it a little bit so that people naturally link to you (whatever link exchange networks may say, this is the most efficient).

Yes, i totally agree and there are various ways in which you can get high quality inbound links, article writing and submission being one of the best. articles with unique and fresh content, submitted on reputable directories can really help with the page rankings

 

[nyenius]

Is it still valid? it's been years.

 

[Postwhore]

Is it still valid? it's been years.

Good question! I didn't realize how old this thread was until I saw your post.

 

[rogaroga]

Lot's of great info here that I wish I had years ago. Great topic!

 

[Wasp]

This is great! It's people like you who rise to the top with a contract list full of people who are willing to help at a moments notice.

 

[MAXPOWERPC]

Awesome article, thanks for sharing your knowledge!

 

[Toobalist]

Very interesting thread guys , I luv it ! Thanks for the suggestions.

 

[Vectorinspector]

I am new to this forum, and although I don't run a forum myself. I do own businesses with websites and do a whole lot of SEO. There has never been a single site that I have worked on that I couldn't get to the first spot in the SERPS. It's a very addictive hobby, especially when you see the results in the engines. And I use a lot of the tools he listed above

 

[AnaaR_Ka_JuiCe]

Hello, dear many links need to be fixed as many link are broken and some sites also do not exist. It will be nice if it can be updated by the author or any Moderator.

 

[ozzy47]

Yeah the article is 11 years old. I will see if I get some time to look into updating this. If anyone has any updated links please share them.

 

[Jack_Rouse]

Well the first paragraph on the OP is wrong so it definitely needs updating, Page Rank has nothing to do with a web sites pages !

Page Rank is simply the name of the bloke ( Larry Page) who designed the algorithm that Google first used to order sites in organic searches.

 

[Adam H]

Well the first paragraph on the OP is wrong so it definitely needs updating, Page Rank has nothing to do with a web sites pages !

Page Rank is simply the name of the bloke ( Larry Page) who designed the algorithm that Google first used to order sites in organic searches.

Why do you comment on anything SEO related, you make your self look silly every single time. Although vastly out of date the OP was correct about how page rank worked at that time.

 

[Jack_Rouse]

Why do you comment on anything SEO related, you make your self look silly every single time. Although vastly out of date the OP was correct about how page rank worked at that time.

Why do you stalk me like a troll.

Are you saying that Page Rank is to do with website pages and is not named after Larry Page ?

Because if you are, you are wrong.

I did not say... that is not how Page Rank worked, read my comments again.

 

[Adam H]

Page Rank has nothing to do with a web sites pages !

See above, thats exactly what you said. Regardless of what or who it was named after the functionality of the old "Page Rank" factor was calculated roughly how the OP outlined, which you blatantly said was wrong.......which it isnt.

I don't stalk you........., you simply post rubbish in a topics and areas which i have vested interest and knowledge in and therefore the mis-information you are fond of spreading is easy to shoot down.

 

[Jack_Rouse]

See above, thats exactly what you said. Regardless of what or who it was named after the functionality of the old "Page Rank" factor was calculated roughly how the OP outlined, which you blatantly said was wrong.......which it isnt.

I don't stalk you........., you simply post rubbish in a topics and areas which i have vested interest and knowledge in and therefore the mis-information you are fond of spreading is easy to shoot down.

Whatever

 

[Jack_Rouse]

See above, thats exactly what you said. Regardless of what or who it was named after the functionality of the old "Page Rank" factor was calculated roughly how the OP outlined, which you blatantly said was wrong.......which it isnt.

I don't stalk you........., you simply post rubbish in a topics and areas which i have vested interest and knowledge in and therefore the mis-information you are fond of spreading is easy to shoot down.

Ok I'm ready for you now Mr SEO "Expert"

Whilst what the OP states may have been true at the time of writing it is not true now.

Changes made by Panda and Penguin now mean that rank is reflection of the quality of the site, rather than individual pages. Whilst pages can affect the sites ranking, they are now only looked on quality wise. The algorithms used make comparisons between the information on any given site with authoritative information on what Google rates as "reliable" site, including those with a .gov domain, or those which are official sites.
The algorithms now ask a series of questions about the site, and the information within it :

http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.co.uk/2011/05/more-guidance-on-building-high-quality.html

As I say the algorithms are now designed to assess the quality of the page or article, and how that affects the rank of the site.


I would suggest that you spend more time reading, than posting on forums, if you were any good at SEO, you would be that busy, you wouldn't have time to post on forums, and troll people, especially those who tend to read what Google says, not what others think.

 

[Adam H]

Ok I'm ready for you now Mr SEO "Expert"

lol your a funny little man Graham, had a couple of whiskeys have we and got those bravery pills out for a bit of a keyboard warrior session before bed.

Yet another post trying to prove something that isnt being debated, if i wanted to go into depth of whats good, bad, ugly or mythical in current Search engine marketing affairs then i would have, but what i actually done was correct your "statements" about what the OP wrote about Page rank to prevent some poor soul actually believing half the rubbish you randomly spurt out.

As we can see by the little gem above, another post where you have quickly googled something to try and gain some kind of little "win" but in actually you've simply outlined the fact you really havent got a Scooby Doo.

 

[Jack_Rouse]

lol your a funny little man Graham, had a couple of whiskeys have we and got those bravery pills out for a bit of a keyboard warrior session before bed.

Yet another post trying to prove something that isnt being debated, if i wanted to go into depth of whats good, bad, ugly or mythical in current Search engine marketing affairs then i would have, but what i actually done was correct your "statements" about what the OP wrote about Page rank to prevent some poor soul actually believing half the rubbish you randomly spurt out.

As we can see by the little gem above, another post where you have quickly googled something to try and gain some kind of little "win" but in actually you've simply outlined the fact you really havent got a Scooby Doo.

Some of us have a day job and sit on a computer writing posts on forums all day

No I haven't "quickly Googled something", unfortunately I don't have a bibliographic ( you may have to look that big word up to understand what it means) mind, and it takes me a little time to find where I read something in order to quote it.
The thing that is mythical in the SEO world is people like you who claim to know how Google works, and claim they can "beat the system" when they don't have a scooby doo as you put it, even Google themselves will not recommend so called "SEO experts".

You cannot go into depth about anything, because there is nothing to go into depth about, there is no magic cure, Matt Cutts himself has said on his blog on many occasions, "if you concentrate on SEO, you will fail, you need to concentrate on adding authoritative, reliable and unique content" the rest will follow and you SITE will climb the organic search pages".

Personally I would rather believe him, than someone who thinks they know what they are talking about.