Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by SEO

  1. Looks like both of our URL's are off a bit... lol
    I intentionally write my URL with a hnnt:// so they do not show up as a link. I learned something from you post though, if you add color it is not viewed as a link... cool ;)




    Your pages are indeed indexed but have you looked at them (the / link-xx.html )?


    Number of Pages indexed for www.quality-wholesale-products.com


    I am seeing this:


    Warning: mysql_fetch_row(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in /home/quality9/public_html/Product_News_and_Reviews/includes/sql_layer.php on line 286


    Category: Main/


    Also, a spider reads the link as http://www.quality-wholesale-products.com/Product_News_and_Reviews/viewlink-9.html which is not the same as http://www.totalchoicehosting.com/

  2. Add this to all your pages (prior to </head>):


    <script language='javascript' type='text/javascript' src='whichcss.js'></script>


    Now use either of the two scripts (naming them whichcss.js).


    Change the names from {window.location='xxx.html'} to {cssfile='xxx.css';}


    eg. from {window.location='640.html'} to {cssfile='640.css';}



    Never done this, let me know if it works.

  3. Or this:


    ><script language="javaScript" type="text/javascript">
    var Wide = screen.width;
    if (Wide <= 640){
      window.location ='640.html'
    else if (Wide <= 800){
      window.location ='800.html'
    else if (Wide <= 1024){
     window.location ='1024.html'
    else {
     window.location ='other.html'

  4. I want to load a particular css style-sheet depending upon the screen resolution of the visitor.


    This should do the trick:

    ><script language="javaScript" type="text/javascript">
    var width = screen.width;
    var res =(((!(640-width))*1)+((!(800-width))*2)+((!(1024-width))*3)+((!(1152-width))*4)+((!(1280-width))*5)+((!(1600-width))*6));
    if(!(res)) res = 1;
    if (res=='1') {window.location='640.html'}
    if (res=='2') {window.location='800.html'}
    if (res=='3') {window.location='1024.html'}
    if (res!='1' && res!='2' && res!='3') {window.location='other.html'}

  5. ...(ii) take possession and ownership of any of your property

    (including any and all intellectual property) in TotalChoice Hosting's possession at the time of such nonpayment

    I am not the person who can give a definite answer (they will come along shortly). However, my understanding is that it is there for the simple reason that we may remove your site from our servers if need be (failure of payment).


    If you think about it, your site is 'your' site. It just happens to be on our servers. We have to have the right to take that property (i.e. the site) and remove it from the server. Technically, if you do not give us that right up front, we could never remove your 'property'.


    Again, you will get an official reply from the 'big guy'.

  6. Shiva: Ok Scott. So if a news article, on a page is about the President, and it involves an interview with Reporter said: President said: and it's a 10 minute interview, you are suggesting the words reporter and president, which may appear 50 times each, if there are 50 responses from the president, will make Google call it spam - that the number of words is over their limit?


    D. Scott: Well it could, it would depend on the conversation. If the interviewer used very, very few words in the question (which would be quite difficult) and the President answered with 'Yes' or 'No', then the density of 'Reporter' and/or 'President' might be to high.


    ‘Shiva’ has a 0.87 density (1 out of 115), as well as ‘D. Scott’


    Another example:


    Reporter: Hi Mr. President.

    President: Hi

    Reporter: How are you?

    President: Good.

    Reporter: What is your favorite color?

    President: Blue.

    Reporter: Do you eat beets?

    President: Yes.

    Reporter: How disgusting!



    ‘Reporter’ has a 16.7% density (5 out of 30) and ‘President’ has a 13.3% density (4 out of 30). No keyword stuffing here (as I said, it would be quite difficult).



    I'm floored at how Goolge would confuse spam with a web page content.
    It is not just Google but all the search engines who deal with this. Think about this though. A sophisticated algorithm is written in order to rank pages according to 'relevancy' for a given search phrase. As long as there are people who pick away at that algorithm in order to understand it and, more importantly, exploit it then the search engines will have to 'filter'. No filter will be perfect, meaning that 'good' content will be filtered and 'bad' content will escape (i.e. confusion). However, it will be a continuous battle (on both sides).



    So, why does Google shove it into the results for "shaving cream"? Money.
    No, it has nothing to do with money (well unless you are considering the money supplied to the optimizer). I did not look at the site (I'm a prude :) ) but if there is no 'shaving' or 'cream' in the source (not just the text) then the likely answer is in the linking text. This is a 'trick' that is referred to as Google Bombing. The most famous case: 'miserable failure'. Google is aware of this flaw and I am sure will be filtering it in the near future.



    ...I'll use Dec stats with a total of 24523 hits - put google as bringing 0.18% of the traffic followed by Yahoo, MSN, and some others.
    It is excellent that you are obtaining traffic from 'other' sources but I think that you may be missing a huge potential of interested viewers. It is a fact that most people search for what they are looking for. If a given site does not rank well for the most logical (and useful) phrases then that site will not be viewed. Would it not be ideal to have you same situation with the added bonus of top rankings with the most relevant keyword phrases? Who could complain?



    99.9% of the information on the internet is pure garbage. 99% of the remaining .01% is useless and 99% of the possibly useful .001% are no longer there.
    I am not as pessimistic. Yes, there is a lot of junk. But, I generally can find the information I seek.... it is a wonderful resource (and I always use Goggle :D )!
  7. Does it mean that I have to put all relevant keywords as many as possible inside of my home page.


    How does that "flirt" with spam?


    Well "as many as possible" sounds like it might trigger a keyword density filter (i.e. there is a maximum number).


    One of the factors that affected so many sites in Google's November changes (a.k.a. Florida Update) is the fact the stemming introduced a lot more 'counted' keywords within a page. Thus, if you were near the maximum limit for a given word or phrase, the 'other' variations of those words within your page may have put you over the limit.

  8. Hide things - things like a 1x1 transparent pixel that links to another page on your site. Use the meta words, name the image with something useful, and do this on each page. This helps bots and sniffers roam your site.
    All the advice is good with this one exception: Never use hidden text or links... never.



    From Google Information for Webmasters - Webmaster Guidelines


    Quality Guidelines - Specific recommendations:


    Avoid hidden text or hidden links.




    I use a small CGI script that reverses the address into an unreadable email format but when the user clicks on it, it works right. When a spam-bot is hunting them down, it gets garbage.


    Shiva this would be a nice script to show... start another post in Scripting Talk

  9. I made a image of a nun saying "I am the sword of Gods justice".


    And Ty as Rob said

    ...it stopped pretty fast


    I guess I should clarify, or someone with more knowledge than me, a redirect would still uses bandwidth. They have to access your server to 'read' the redirect.


    You are talking about a very, very small amount but they still are 'using' your server. The best solution is to get them to stop using it altogether. If an email does not get the results a clever image will. In other words, I personally would not do the redirect.

  10. Does the redirect use any bandwidth?


    Sure, I'd love to put up something nasty but what's the point?


    It does not have to be 'nasty', just clever. The point would be that the hot linking would be halted quickly (well depending on your 'cleverness').

  11. Sure, a redirect would work. Obviously you would want to change all your own references to that image first.


    You could also create a 'special' image just for them. I know of this being done and it causes all sorts of havoc... they thought their entire site was hacked. So, it depends on how much fun you want to have with them.

  12. Yes, she is :lol:


    [ Thumbs Up Robert]



    Does it mean that I have to put all relevant keywords as many as possible inside of my home page.

    Sounds like you may be flirting with spam... I would read the [just ok] article that Tracy recommended (and follow the links) and you will get a better idea of preparing your pages for the search engines.

  13. ...how important is the all caps thing?


    You will be OK, leave them B)



    This +www.naturalimagesweb.+com placed in the Google search window will give you all the pages within Google's index that reference your site.


    All the pages that reference you


    When one looks at backlinks from the toolbar, it will only show what is referred to as 'relevant links', meaning those pages that have a PageRank of 4 or higher.


    Are those 'missing' pages in this list?


    Also, a site can link to you via a PHP script or JavaScript which will not be 'viewed' by a search engine spider (and thus not pass on the citation [or credit]). Go to those sites in question and see how they are linking to you.


    Good luck.

  14. Yeah...go ahead and change the description for Natural Images, please.





    Loved the images... such memories. My wife (did her undergraduate work at CSU) and I took our three children to Colorado last Thanksgiving for the first time (well at least the first time that they will remember). Got up into Rocky Mountain National Park but Trail Ridge was closed :goof:


    I miss it. We live in a really pretty place here (or at least that is what everyone tells me)... the finger lakes of Western New York.


    However, beauty is relative... and I have seen the Rockies!

  15. Oh, wanted to add:


    You live in a beautiful part of the country :heart


    My family is originally from Colorado Springs (as in way back). I have spent many fond memories in the Colorado Rockies and in the Flat Tops specifically. My father, brother-in-law and myself always took two full weeks in the back country each summer (not always Colorado and not always the Rockies but they were our perennial favorites). I have come out of the wilderness area and had many a fine meal in Meeker (the first civilized meal [i.e. grease].


    Actually now that I think about it... :goof: I got a cotton-picken ticket on highway 13 once and the state trooper hauled me into Meeker to post bail (I had an out of state drivers license [CA no less] and I believe we looked pretty... well let us say 'ruff'.


    No hard feelings though, it is truly a beautiful place :P

  • Create New...