next »

[Ekim]

Have you noticed that SMF page description in google isn't very effective? Try doing a site:perkiset.org and all the pages comes up like this:

SMF post subject here
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. September 01, 2007, 09:30:01 AM. 1 Hour, 1 Day, 1 Week, 1 Month, Forever. Login with username, password and ...

The default description is

<meta name="description" content="', $context['page_title'], '" />

which is exactly the same as the page title and google is totally ignoring it.

I checked the SMF site and didn't see any mod for it. That's kind of odd with all the smf forums out there...

Anyway, if any of you guys ever come up with a way to create a better description, please post it here 

I'll keep looking and do the same...

[perkiset]

From a site: perspective that's what it returns, but if we come up from a search result then the text reflects closer to where G found the page...

Question then, to the group: would it be better to ip-deliver a spider-only theme that puts the content of the page up top then JSs it down into the main body - not a cloak, just a slightly different theme for spiders?

Thoughts?

[nutballs]

Possible suggestions, but not sure if they can be done easily since I know nothing about SMF.

shuffle the words in the description.
Pull the first sentence of the post and use as the description.

they wont be perfect, but at least they will be different.

[nutballs]

oh and I forgot to respond to perks question lol.

that is not a cloak, so it is fine. A cloak is to display different content and even different "concepts" to the spider than the human, which you are WELL versed in. All you are suggesting to do is DHTML technically. It would be no different than having a page that when it loads, the content is displayed in a random quadrant of the page or even just floats around on its own layer. Annoying as hell to a user, but non-the-less, legal from G's point of view(IMHO).

[perkiset]

I was just wondering if it is even worth it - in the day I would cloak to make sure the real content ( ) was way up on top because of the page-size boundaries from the G spider... but that seems to be long gone - so I don't know that there's any benefit in that effort since the descriptions in G SERPS look good... just not site: