Ads

Confused by the title? Well, I thought I might venture deeper into the SEO myth realm and I uncovered some other SEO myths lists which I mostly liked.

What’s most interesting about these is that most of them do not feature the same myths. So it seems search engine optimization is full of myths. Some lists even contradict each other.

What surprise indeed.

What else did I uncover? A detail that sheds new light on our “Top 10 SEO Myths” discussion at Sphinn. You’ll have to read the whole post or scroll down until I tell you what it is.

At first check my meta-list of the top 7 top SEO myths lists! Ouch, my tongue hurts and my brain is dizzy! The newest first:

  1. Top Ten Organic SEO Myths by Jill Whalen at Search Engine Land
  2. 9 Web Site Optimization (SEO) Myths Debunked by DISC
  3. 5 Myths about SEO by Top Rank Blogger Lee Odden himself in 2006
  4. 5 Myths in SEO by Modern Life (is Rubbish) from 2006
  5. The Top SEO Myths, All Of It Hearsay at WebProNews in 2005
  6. Top 7 SEO Myths at Rank for Sales from 2005
  7. Top Five Search Engine Optimization Myths by ClickZ from 2003!

I told you! 2008 will be the year of the meta-list. I love self-fulfilling prophecies!

So what was the detail that sheds new light on the original list which sparked so much unrest? It was originally published in 2005 at an article directory by Big Oak SEO!

Which one is the most accurate? What do you think? #1 is in my opinion the most debateable while most of the others are common sense. According to Jill Whalen:

  • you can drop xml-sitemaps,
  • fresh content,
  • h1-hX titles,
  • the long tail
  • Google’s webmaster guidelines are read only “just for fun”
  • while buying links is OK.

Do you really agree?

del.icio.us StumbleUpon Facebook Google Mixx Sphinn TwitThis
March, 2008 | You can follow comments through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a comment, or trackback.

This thing has 5 Comments

  1. Posted March 6, 2008 at 2:16 am | Permalink

    I’m not sure I agree with dropping the XML sitemaps. When I update my xml sitemap, it literally updates google within an hour with the fresh content.

  2. David
    Posted March 6, 2008 at 12:10 pm | Permalink

    I have also seen MASSIVE improvements after setting up an xml-sitemap!

    And certainly, for a NEWS website, it makes a huge difference if the site is changed every minute, or once a day!!!

    I believe that freshness is definately a concern for most websites - or do you know many subjects out there that have NOT changed in the last year?

  3. Posted March 7, 2008 at 7:31 pm | Permalink

    DD: Thanks for the feedback.
    David: Yeah, sites like news sites which have lots of fresh content which is not necessarily linked on the frontpage can benefit strongly from XML sitemaps.

  4. Posted March 17, 2008 at 11:34 am | Permalink

    Very nice article! i see this site through google.

  5. Posted August 7, 2008 at 11:09 am | Permalink

    Excellent work done. All myths at the best place. Keep it Up.

Post a Comment

Please mind the commenting netiquette, most notably:

  • A "name" is a real name or nick name, not a keyword! SEO Company is wrong. John Doe of Google is OK.
  • For the "website" URL: No deep links allowed unless it's your "about" page.
  • No extra signature allowed, one "website" link is enough.
  • No bot-like "Thank you" comments with no context or added value to the post.

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*