__/ [ Paul ] on Sunday 25 June 2006 23:25 \__

> On Sun, 25 Jun 2006 22:18:18 GMT, in alt.internet.search-engines you
> wrote:
>
>>
>>Hello
>
> Hi
>
>>How long does it take before Google grabs my website ?
>
> No set time.
>
>>I'ts now more than a week that my website is on-line, but i still can't
>>find it in Google
>
> You won't.
> You need, amongst other things, inbound links to your site.
>
> Google is also in a mess atm, and you site is brand new. Even when it
> has found it, it wi;; probably come around every month or so until you
> are more established.
>
>
>>So sad...
>
> Not at all.
> You expect too much too soon.


Yes. Depending on the number/quality of links, this may take anything from
days, to weeks, to months. Took me a couple of weeks for full indexing of a
new site with good inbound links. When Google actually worked properly, that
is... spam is interfering with its operation at the moment, so clean your
act together. Tolerance for cheating will be low.


>>www. lincostar.eu
>
> If that is the web site in question, then if I were you, I would clean
> up you act straight away.
>
> The only thing sad here is that you are using black hat tricks.
>
> Hiiden text ?
>
> You will be banned before you get going.
>
> YOU are the one that is so sad.
>
>
>
>
> APQP European automotive technology for China ?????????
> Advanced Product Quality Planning A structured method of defining and
> establishing the steps necessary to assure that a product satisfies
> the customer.


Oh, dear. Good catch, Paul. It reminds me the blog of a long-ago-departed
blogger, who helped me fight blog spam. Yesterday I returned to the site
after it had been down for many months. Here is what I found:

http:// mookitty.co.uk/

I wonder if someone just bought her deleted domain. While she was fighting
spam, she also had fascination with poker, so who knows....

Best wishes,

Roy

--
Roy S. Schestowitz | England - 1 Ecuador - 0
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
5:10am up 59 days 10:24, 12 users, load average: 1.18, 0.52, 0.29
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms

"tonnie" <t.prasing@chello.nl> schreef in bericht
news:4ga3lfF1mgj8sU1@individual.net...
> Rudyard Kipling wrote:
>>
>> Hello
>>
>>
>> How long does it take before Google grabs my website ?
>>
>> I'ts now more than a week that my website is on-line, but i still can't
>> find it in Google
>>
>> So sad...
>>
>> www.lincostar.eu
>
> A splash screen, text in images hm....
>
> You'll probably never get found in a search engine this way.
> Either redo the site yourself or hire a professional.


Ok, i'll go for option 2
How much should i pay to redo it in a professional way ?

"Stacey" <Remove-the-Y-stacey@staceyssimplestuff.com>

[...]
>>>Any other suggestion to improve the website?
>>
>> CSS and white hat.

OK, got it


> Start over!

Hey, guys, have some mercy please.

I'll look out for a professional to redo the whole thing.
But at least i know now what i want.

Rudyard Kipling wrote:

> So sad...
>
> www.lincostar.eu

Quite.

What I have trouble with is how you managed to use quite so many lines
to produce your homepage... oh you used Microsoft products!!! This
should really go in the A.I.S-E FAQ - never, ever use Microsoft products
to produce web pages, serve databases or do anything else connected with
the Internet unless you have a thorough understanding of the technology
first.

Before you worry about Search Engines you need to have a very basic
understanding of the Web's language HTML and understand the different
between formatting and markup.

Your Chinese language version probably ranks as the most search engine
unfriendly site I have ever seen and will never get indexed. How is
Google.cn or Baidu supposed to understand an Image? OCR maybe? The same
for the English site, you are using Images rather than text for text.
Doh! The ALT stuff won't rank in search engines. Not only that but the
image text is pretty much unreadable on Firefox.


That said, your home page is in Google - here is the description a
searcher will see:

˙ţ< html xmlns : v = " urn : schemas - microsoft - com : vml ...
if gte vml 1 ] > < v : shape id = " _ x 0 0 0 0 _ s 2 0 9 5 " type = " #
_ x 0 0 0 0 _ t 7 5 " href = " http : / / www . lincostar . eu / chinese
/ home ...
www.lincostar.eu/ - 219k - Cached - Similar pages

Not much use is it? However it is a start. Restructure the HTML (see
Paul's advice about CSS) and the other pages will get picked up.

I don't go totally with the advice other's have given about employing a
professional web designer to do your site as usually they know
absolutely nothing about Search Engines and SEO. If you expect most of
your visitors to come via this channel it is an important factor in site
design.

Before you go further I would get a book about SEO:

<http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1411622510/>

Something you can read in a few days that will teach you the terminology
and how SE's work and what SEO is about. Later take a look at something
like Aaron Wall's digital book:

<http://www.seobook.com/>

If you want to go further.

And get a book on Website creation that covers stuff like CSS.


It would take very little effort to sort your site out. You could do it
quite well in FrontPage but you would need to sort out a standard's
compliant template and CSS for you (which is what I mean about
understanding the technology before using Microshite products).

David

davidof <david.george@g-dumpthisbit-mail.com> wrote:

> What I have trouble with is how you managed to use quite so many lines
> to produce your homepage... oh you used Microsoft products!!! This
> should really go in the A.I.S-E FAQ - never, ever use Microsoft products
> to produce web pages, serve databases or do anything else connected with
> the Internet unless you have a thorough understanding of the technology
> first.

Put above that: Never ever bash a company/product if you have no clue what
you're talking about and just are repeating fanboy FUD.

--
John

Net::Google and Perl: http://johnbokma.com/perl/net-google.html

John Bokma wrote:
> davidof <david.george@g-dumpthisbit-mail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>What I have trouble with is how you managed to use quite so many lines
>>to produce your homepage... oh you used Microsoft products!!! This
>>should really go in the A.I.S-E FAQ - never, ever use Microsoft products
>>to produce web pages, serve databases or do anything else connected with
>>the Internet unless you have a thorough understanding of the technology
>>first.
>
>
> Put above that: Never ever bash a company/product if you have no clue what
> you're talking about and just are repeating fanboy FUD.

John,

I think you should read and think about what I said a bit more rather
than making rash statements. Obviously the heat wave in Mexico has been
frazzling your brain.

If you use Excel, Word, Frontpage straight out of the tin for building
web pages you will end up SE unfriendly, often non-compliant, horribly
bloated sites like the one we have just seen. If you read further down
you will see I suggested that he indeed uses FP but makes sure that he
uses a stylesheet and has a standards complaint template to work from
which FP will do.

It is funny, but over the x number of years I've been reading and
contributing to this n.g. a lot of people with problems with their
website have been using some MS product or another to construct the
pages. Just take a a look at the guy's site as it rather proves my
statement.

Similarly connecting an Access database via PWS to the Internet or even
IIS is going to give you some potential major headaches. Connecting a PC
running unpatched versions of Windows products (or ones that don't have
the latest patch MS is working on) can potentially get your PC owned or
infected with virus or other mal/adware. The number of PCs I have had to
clean out of viruses testfies to this. The same is true for other OS of
course but it doesn't make the above statement any less valid. I repeat
what I say, if the users had understood a bit better what they were
doing then they would not have had these problems. I have had a Windows
2000 system directly connected to the Internet for the last 5 years with
no problems, it is a question of understand what MS is giving you.

Similarly for .Net driven sites, you can easily end up with an interface
that only works with IE excluding a growing population of other browsers.

The danger with MS products is that they hide a lot the complexity of
what they are doing under a few mouse clicks without the user being
aware of the horrible HTML, jaded javascript and ActivX plugins their
site is being built with.

davidof <david.george@g-dumpthisbit-mail.com> wrote:

> John Bokma wrote:
>> davidof <david.george@g-dumpthisbit-mail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>What I have trouble with is how you managed to use quite so many
>>>lines to produce your homepage... oh you used Microsoft products!!!
>>>This should really go in the A.I.S-E FAQ - never, ever use Microsoft
>>>products to produce web pages, serve databases or do anything else
>>>connected with the Internet unless you have a thorough understanding
>>>of the technology first.
>>
>>
>> Put above that: Never ever bash a company/product if you have no clue
>> what you're talking about and just are repeating fanboy FUD.
>
> John,
>
> I think you should read and think about what I said a bit more rather
> than making rash statements. Obviously the heat wave in Mexico has
> been frazzling your brain.

Nope, especially since there is no heat wave here (remember, Mexico is
not a small country).

> If you use Excel, Word, Frontpage straight out of the tin for building
> web pages you will end up SE unfriendly,

Recent version of Frontpage seems to be quite ok for making webpages,
not much worse compared to other so called WYSIWYG editors.

> often non-compliant,

like so many other WYSIWYG editors. It seems to be hard to do it right.
Who cares if it works in 90% of the browsers?

> horribly
> bloated sites like the one we have just seen.

Bloated doesn't mean that it's bad for SEO per se. Like I said many
times before, HTML code is parsed, and what's not needed is dropped. You
don't get bad points for making a SE parser working harder.


> If you read further down
> you will see I suggested that he indeed uses FP but makes sure that he
> uses a stylesheet and has a standards complaint template to work from
> which FP will do.

Same holds for DW etc. Oh, and standards? W3C *doesn't* publice
standards. They publish recommendations. You don't mean an ISO HTML
template :-)

> It is funny, but over the x number of years I've been reading and
> contributing to this n.g. a lot of people with problems with their
> website have been using some MS product or another

Exactly, or another: Dreamweaver, even a text editor.

> Similarly connecting an Access database via PWS to the Internet or
> even IIS is going to give you some potential major headaches.

I have more experience with Apache, MySQL, PHP, Perl etc. And Apache,
MySQL, PHP, Perl, etc. is able to do exactly the same.

> Connecting a PC running unpatched versions of Windows products (or
> ones that don't have the latest patch MS is working on) can
> potentially get your PC owned or infected with virus or other
> mal/adware.

Connecting a default installation of GNU/Linux or any *nix installation
might be not smart either. Running Apache for months without patching
it, ditto. Get it right, software *does* have bugs. That's why this year
people had to update PHPbb several times.

> The number of PCs I have had to clean out of viruses
> testfies to this.

No, it shows what the majority of inexperienced people are using.

> The same is true for other OS of course but it
> doesn't make the above statement any less valid. I repeat what I say,
> if the users had understood a bit better what they were doing then
> they would not have had these problems.

Very true. The problem is the user, or better, the lack of software that
is user friendly in a true sense (which I doubt is possible). Not
Microsoft.

> Similarly for .Net driven sites, you can easily end up with an
> interface that only works with IE excluding a growing population of
> other browsers.

"Growing" is still insignificant compared to the userbase of IE. Sure,
it's nice if your product works with 100% of your visitors, but the
question for the majority of site owners is: is it really worth the
money to make it work for the last 1.03% ? In most cases the answer is
no, not even for the last 10%.

> The danger with MS products is that they hide a lot the complexity of
> what they are doing under a few mouse clicks

Is this restricted to MS products? That was the point I was trying to
make. I get very tired of all those clueless MS rants. Ever installed
LAMP? Just a few mouse clicks. Ever used Ubuntu? Installation is just a
few mouse clicks.

Ever compiled Apache and installed it? Just a few commands on the CLI.
If you don't read the manual you will do stupid things, no matter what
you are using. You will overlook functionality. That's why I do my best
to always read the manual, even if I buy something simple.

> without the user being
> aware of the horrible HTML, jaded javascript and ActivX plugins their
> site is being built with.

You think that an open source product like nvu does this better?

IT is more and more about abstraction (probably always was, but now more
code is involved when a simple mouse button is clicked). It was
certainly not invented by MS.

Ask yourself, in a business, what counts: getting 500+ pages on the web,
within 20 hours that can be used by 87% of the visitors, or having
someone work on it for 5 weeks, and it works for 97.3% of the visitors.

As for SEO, you either do it yourself, or you hire someone.

Most SEO help asked here, IMO, are people who can't neither.

Finally, there are plenty of tools available for cleaning up HTML. If I
was asked to clean up hundreds of pages created with FrontPage I
probably would check tidy first, and if that didn't do the job, I would
write a clean up script in Perl (1-2 days of work). In the end it might
be cheaper then teach someone to manually code hundreds of pages. And
for quite some companies, just ignoring the 10% might be cheaper and
less error prone.


--
John Experienced Perl programmer: http://castleamber.com/

Fart Free Fox: http://johnbokma.com/firefox/find-in-page-sound.html

Hi,

im so jubilant i base that forum.
i see fit try to place more and in stuff.

thanks,
Danny


äëøåéåú
ñèåöéí, äëøåéåú çéìåôé æåâåú
äëøåéåú
ñèåöéí, äëøåéåú çéìåôé æåâåú