We're on Google!

Post by **DRT** » 18:21 Fri 06 Jul 2007

The following search puts us in slot number 1 on google...........

"vintage port"+"meaningless drivel"

derek

Conky · Post by **Conky** » 18:25 Fri 06 Jul 2007

From small acorns...

Post by **jdaw1** » 18:34 Fri 06 Jul 2007

"do you know the Bishop of Norwich" port has TPF at #4.

As does "apostrophe crimes".

Conky · Post by **Conky** » 18:37 Fri 06 Jul 2007

So we'll catch all the surreal and unusual, but we could do with catching the masses. Suppose it'll be a long time before just 'Port' will do it.

Alan.

Post by **DRT** » 18:40 Fri 06 Jul 2007

Oi Bug-a-lugs gets #1

Conky · Post by **Conky** » 18:46 Fri 06 Jul 2007

I'm keeping this bloody Forum afloat!

Post by **DRT** » 18:56 Fri 06 Jul 2007

OK - serious question

The above examples prove that google is registering these commonly occuring phrases when it crawls over the site. Our objective is to ensure google picks up "Vintage Port" and/or other phrases as many times as it takes to bump us up the pecking order.

Does anyone know whether or not the crawler would make a distinction between a phrase that occurs many times in a single post against a phrase that is used once in many posts or threads?

What I'm asking is - do we create a single post that has 1000 instances of the following block of text or would we have to create 1000 posts or threads with 1 block in each?

Vintage Port
Colhieta
Quinta
Aged Tawny
Reserve Port
Ruby Port
Tawny Port
Port Forum

Derek

Post by **jdaw1** » 18:59 Fri 06 Jul 2007

Derek T. wrote:do we create a single post that has 1000 instances of the following block of text or would we have to create 1000 posts or threads with 1 block in each?

Vintage Port
Colhieta
Quinta
Aged Tawny
Reserve Port
Ruby Port
Tawny Port
Port Forum

No. Google detects for ‘natural language’ use of things. Anything that google thinks is written for the search engine, and not so tagged† , rather than being written for a human, is penalised hard.

But we should use “vintage port† in sentences rather than “VP†. Emphasis: in natural sentences, where one might otherwise write “VP†.

† Tagged? Start, say, at this page. View source, however you do that in your preferred browser. There is a line

Code: Select all

<meta name="description" content="Chapter 1 (Money Markets) of Pricing Money: A Beginner&rsquo;s Guide to Money, Bonds, Futures and Swaps.">

That line cannot be seen by an ordinary non-source-viewing user. Nonetheless, it is clearly tagged as being for the search engine: there is no deceit. Such content is not penalised (though is probably ignored).

Post by **DRT** » 19:06 Fri 06 Jul 2007

Great stuff, these are the things we need to know.

So, should everyone put Vintage Port in their signature to ensure it appears at least once in every post?

Another question is - do you get a premium "hit" if these key words or phrases are found on the home page? If so, perhaps we need to look at the descriptions against each of the Forum areas and see if we can shoe-horn Vintage Port into as many of them as possible.

Derek

Post by **jdaw1** » 19:08 Fri 06 Jul 2007

Derek T. wrote:see if we can shoe-horn Vintage Port into as many of them as possible

Overdo it, and Mr. Google’s cunning algorithm asks itself what we are doing. That wouldn’t be good. Keep usage natural.

Post by **DRT** » 19:11 Fri 06 Jul 2007

OK - but Mr Google seems to think Oi Bug-a-lugs is natural useage, so should we all have Vintage Port in signatures?

Post by **jdaw1** » 19:13 Fri 06 Jul 2007

Well, there’s no harm in it being mentioned from time to time in posts.

Post by **Alex Bridgeman** » 10:46 Sat 07 Jul 2007

I've put vintage port into my signature line to try and increase the number of times that Google spots the phrase (Vintage Port) on TPF.

I guess it won't do any harm for as many of us as possible to have Vintage Port in our signatures.

So, come on everyone, make sure Vintage Port appears at least once in your posts.

Alex

Post by **jdaw1** » 13:51 Sat 07 Jul 2007

Google’s algorithm is secret. But it does attempt to spot over saturation: see, amongst many possibilities, this page.

Post by **Alex Bridgeman** » 07:55 Fri 13 Jul 2007

I just did another search on (Yahoo this time) for "Vintage Port" and for +"Vintage Port" +forum.

Sad to say, The Port Forum did not feature in the first 100 hits. It wasn't until I did a search for "The Port Forum" that I got a hit for this site.

Alex

Post by **jdaw1** » 13:27 Fri 13 Jul 2007

TPF is new. Allow google to parse it a few times. Its algorithm surely recognises phpBB, and will—over time—realise that this is an active forum.

Post by **Alex Bridgeman** » 08:00 Sat 28 Jul 2007

I've just done a search on Google, searching the entire web, using as my search string

+"Vintage Port" +forum

and the site now appears on page 2 of the results at number 17. The link that was thrown up was this one:

The Port Forum.com :: View topic - 2003 Quinta do Crasto Vintage PortMy first Vintage Port in the Douro, EVER Cool Not decanted. ... You cannot post new topics in this forum ... You cannot delete your posts in this forum ...
viewtopic.php?t=232&sid=d2a05c8ff1be02e ... ab2042cb37 - 16k - Cached - Similar pages

A similar search on Yahoo does not yet get the Port Forum high enough up the list for my limited patience to find it.

Alex

Conky · Post by **Conky** » 22:25 Fri 03 Aug 2007

Using the words The, Port and Forum on Google. We come up as the second link. Thats good.

Using just Port and Forum, we again are the 2nd link.

So we are now Officially out there for anyone who wants to talk Port. Lets keep it going.

Alan

uncle tom · Post by **uncle tom** » 23:15 Fri 03 Aug 2007

Using Port and Forum I got us in at third - some little upstart place called Ellesmere Port gets in the way...

..that's near you isn't it Conky?

- go sort 'em out - arrest them for something - would you??

Tom

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 00:42 Sat 04 Aug 2007

Typing "Port Forum" with or without quotes got us second on Google. This is utterly brilliant. We also now have a Google rank of 0/10. OK, not so good, but it is a rank, which we didn't have before.

All in all, pretty good.

Post by **DRT** » 00:46 Sat 04 Aug 2007

Very Good - how do we get the rank up?

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 00:48 Sat 04 Aug 2007

Derek T. wrote:Very Good - how do we get the rank up?

Keep posting and wait. There are a few things but an active site is better than most.

Post by **DRT** » 00:58 Sat 04 Aug 2007

OK - will do

How do you see the rank on google?

KillerB · Post by **KillerB** » 01:24 Sat 04 Aug 2007

Now, that's asking. I saw it as 0/10 and when I went back to look it had gone. You need to download Google Toolbar and it will be there. Just sometimes it shows as "No page rank information available".

Such is life.

Ghandih · Post by **Ghandih** » 12:02 Sat 04 Aug 2007

Changed my signature, too, given the Lugs success.

ThePortForum.com

We're on Google!

Google: TPF at #4

Keep usage natural.

Well, there’s no harm in it being mentioned

Google’s algorithm is secret

Allow google to parse it a few times