I messed up. In remaking Greensboro 101 a couple of years ago, I took away some things that search engines like to see. As a result, Greensboro 101 fell off search engine radar of searches for "Greensboro." Bad.
I paid more attention to search engine optimization in the latest remake of Greensboro 101 and it looks like my efforts may be bearing fruit. A search for "Greensboro" on Bing now has Greensboro 101 on the first page of search results. I'm still waiting for Google to follow the new sitemap.
Something you may want to look at Roch is implementing the "original source" tag on your site. Would be beneficial to the community as a whole, and 101 would appear less like a scraper...
ReplyDeletehttp://googlenewsblog.blogspot.com/2010/11/credit-where-credit-is-due.html
Thanks for the comment and suggestion, Liv. Greensboro 101 already provides a link to the original source of every blog, news and video item. Google's experimental metatag appears to be an effort to rectify unattributed copies.
ReplyDeleteAlso, Google's experimental tag only seems suitable for a single reproduction from a single source. The multiple metatags that would represent the original sources of the excerpts on Greensboro 101 would not be connected in any way to their respective excerpts in the body of the page, rendering them useless. (metatags cannot go in the body of a webpage.) Google would have no indication what source tag goes with what content.
I can see why Google wants something like this, but what they've come up with is unsatisfactory for a page that has multiple sources for multiple excerpts on a single page.
Technically, Google says multiple tags can be used to identify multiple sources leading up to ONE original, but that still doesn't describe Greensboro 101 in that there is no one original on Greensboro 101. From my understanding, it would be like telling Google that any particular phrase found on Greensboro 101, for example, "City council votes to require gun ownership" as coming from all of the sources found in all of the original-source metatags, and that's not accurate.
ReplyDelete