Just a quick question about spamming.

I'm currently producing a web site which provides free downloads. if my keywords are, "free downloads,free mp3, free screensavers, free games, free utils, free virus defence,free wallpaper,free graphics....etc" would this be classed as spamming because I keep on using the word 'free' or will the search engines look at the whole phrase.

Many thanks in advance.

It appears that the accepted connection to the main site is via hyperlinks, rather than some re-direct mechanism.

To amplify: I had this notion of doorway pages, as pages optimized for specific SE (and perhaps keyword) that would terrific to the spider, terrible for humans. The spider would index the doorway url, but when a user clicked on the doorway url, s/he would magically be transported to the client site.

I was always curious about whether this was a re-direct (which I understand SEs take a dim view of) or something more brilliant.

Please straighten me out.

The changes that he wants made will be on one of the pages within a frameset. The changes will be relatively insignificant (he wants to change a few sentences and a few graphics.) My optimized noframes tag will remain the same.

I'm very concerned that these minor changes could affect the keyword density and mess up my rankings.

What should I do? Has anyone had any experience with this? Will changing the text on a page within a frameset affect the rank if the frameset page remains the same?

Any advice is greatly appreciated.

http://www.DontYouJustLoveSpam-Not.com

[This message has been edited by SearchEngineer (edited 05-11-2001).]

My recommendation is to take out the commas and go "free downloads mp3...." etc. This way you only use free once. Remember, many search engines do not use the keywords meta tag and to get good rankings for these terms you are going to need LOTS of good text content and some high-powered incoming links.

This is the site that needs changing:

Nevermind...

I got the advice I needed.

[This message has been edited by Molly (edited 08-14-2000).]

"It appears that the accepted connection to the main site is via hyperlinks, rather than some re-direct mechanism."

Re-directs are frowned upon, and usually viewed as spam when encountered by a spider. If used carefully, and delayed 8+, they can be ok.

"To amplify: I had this notion of doorway pages, as pages optimized for specific SE (and perhaps keyword) that would terrific to the spider, terrible for humans. The spider would index the doorway url, but when a user clicked on the doorway url, s/he would magically be transported to the client site."

Well, for one thing, if your page is optimized it does not need to be search engine specific. I have pages carefully optimized (not technically doorways but regular site pages) that rank across the board. What you describe is usually a machine generate spam page (looks terrific to the spider, terrible for humans.)

While the original use for a doorway page was to rank highly for a specific term(s) in search engines, this was soon recognized and is now punished by search engines.. Most sites are better served by creating quality pages with useful content that are optimized to rank and stand on their own in the eyes of the spider and the user.

Might not hurt ya but why not buy insurance.

Start over with mercedes-benz-auto-parts.com
That will make the client happy and it might rank as well.

imho

[added - all NEW content]

[This message has been edited by Mike Mackin (edited 08-10-2000).]

what you tell me is what I have come to suspect. I appreciate your confirmation.

Or perhaps this is just a commercial...I can't believe anyone able to get those rankings would not understand this.

[This message has been edited by Jambo (edited 08-10-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Hampstead (edited 05-11-2001).]

what you tell me is what I have come to suspect. I appreciate your confirmation.

The spiders are mostly interested in whats between your noframes tag.

Do not think you have a problem. Just do not resubmit the site after the changes.

Here's my 2 cents, also paid for

I'd like to comment on one of crash's points, as well as take exception to a minor point. I also have pages that are well optimized, part of a site, that do well across the board. That is not only because of how they're optimized, but also because they are part of a site.

When we're looking at Google, what's relevant is not only what's on the page but on the whole site - not only the page and site architecture, but the way the pages relate to each other (read: theming), and how the site itself relates to other sites on the web (read: link text and Page Rank). So well optimized works up to a point, done site-wide.

However, where I have to take minor exception, as an example, is in the area of how ranking for Google compares to ranking for Ink, particularly with paid submissions, where it is the page alone that will determine the ranking, tempered by the fact that Ink pages are often competing in a category filled with directory pages, which in effect will bury even the best optimized, most highly relevant pages.

So a page that ranks top 5 at Google for the most important keyword phrase, while ranking equally well with Ink, could end up #1 amongst the Ink pages, down on page 10 under all the directory listings. Not good. For this reason, an *additional* page will have to be specifically done, targeted to a relevant phrase for which there are few directory listings, to at least stand a fighting chance of being found.

In addition, there is a difference between Ink and Google criteria for page size and keyword density, to some degree, as well as title length and on-page keyword distribution and placement.

So while I agree 95%, using this as an example, I'd have to say that to some extent additional page(s) would be beneficial to create as search-engine specific - again, done on the same site, with which I agree.

Mike - I know. I told the client this. It worries me to change stuff on a page that does well. But, on the other hand, if the info isn't relevant, all the traffic in the world doesn't do any good. It's a tough call.

Jambo - I'm sorry to have offended you. Yes, I've worked very hard to place this page. But I really don't think working with frames is so cut and dry... I do believe that some spiders look deeper than just the frameset page.

Fact is, I've never had to change a page that I've ranked - I was looking for real advice on what the effects might be. It wasn't a plug (If I had intended it to be, I would have put the url in the first message. In any case, I'm not taking on any new clients at the moment.)

Thanks ihelpyou, the changes have been made (with as little effect to the overall wordcount as possible.) I'll drop by and let everyone know what happened soon.

Michael K the re-direct technique you describe will get you in trouble. If you rank a URL, then you really need to make the content that ranked that page available to the viewer searching for that term. Engines don't take kindly to URL's that rank but are never shown to the public. If you build doorways that rank well you should be willing to show that content to the viewer and let them decide to click through to the client site, or return to the engine for another search/choice.

[This message has been edited by praxis (edited 09-10-2001).]

(1) I was originally planning to take our most popular 'old' URLs, and turn them into redirects to the new URLs (let's say the top 20 URLs). Thus, visitors would not see a 404 page. When managment insisted on submitting the old site to search engines, I thought the redirects would help, because search engine visitors would still be sent to an accurate page. However, as I read more about SEO, I am worried that these redirects will be considered doorway pages and my site will be banned???

(2) In contrast, let's say my new site goes live and we don't use the redirects. So the old URLs just go to a custom 404 page. If I resubmit to the search engines right away, how long would it take for these old URLs to disappear??

I know this is not ideal, but ya can only argue so much with the powers-that-be...

Thanks very much!
K