Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I want to create a website where people can create events related to education, entertainment, sports, regional, cultural etc. Every user will have its own page which will be publicly available. Now I want to make sure that these events are searchable by all the search engines such as Google, Bing etc, as soon as the event is created. How can I achieve this?
There is nothing special you need to do to make your website crawlable, as long as your text is in html, and not generated by javascript exclusively and can be found on an url search engines will find it.
With that said if you want to speed up the indexing process you can programmatically ping google for every new content entry you make.
eg ping google:
http://www.google.com/webmasters/sitemaps/ping?sitemap=URLOFSITEMAP.xml
to ping bing:
http://www.bing.com/webmaster/ping.aspx?siteMap=http://www.yourdomain.com/sitemap.xml
Most search engines have an option for pinging similar to this. Keep in mind that yahoo and bing use the same technology, so you only need to ping bing.
You also need to populate your XML sitemap everytime you create new content and then automatically ping it using the url above. This will make sure that all your content is indexed as fast as possible.
Important SEO Techniques to follow:
#1 – Optimize your title tags
#2 – Create compelling meta descriptions. Make sure that words used in meta tag descriptions should be reused in a page content.
#3 – Utilize keyword-rich headings
#4 – Add ALT tags to your images.
#5 – Create a sitemap
#6 – Build internal links between pages
#7 – Update your site regularly
#8 - Provide Accessibility for all users.
high-powered link building campaigns
always require that good old optimized content
Optimize your head section within HTML, Use a unique and relevant title and meta description on every page
title description for a tags
Alt text for IMG tags
use proper H1, H2,...H6 tags
Use keywords in your URLs and file names,
Use your keywords as anchor text when linking internally.
Social network marketing can also help, Use press releases wisely.
Start a blog and participate with other related blogs.
Do keyword research at the start of the project.(good free tool is Google’s AdWords Keyword Tool, which doesn’t show exact numbers. so you may use paid versions of Keyword Discovery or WordTracker)
SEO isn’t a one-time event. Search engine algorithms change regularly, so the tactics that worked last year may not work this year. SEO requires a long-term outlook and commitment.
For more help refer:
really nice article:
12 steps for better SEO
21 Tips for SEO
Jump start with below links:
https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/35291?hl=en
http://www.bing.com/toolbox/seo-analyzer
gud luck :)
Related
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
Please help me out here people so that I can give a middle finger to the small firm where I was the sole web developer, from which I was sacked after only 2 days into a trial.
So, for just an afternoon, they asked me to look into their SEO markup. Which I did.
They were using Magento, and using subdomains with separate instances to market a slightly different product set and slightly different pricing to different countries under au.subdomain, uk.subdomain, can.subdomain etc. Pants way of doing it I know but I'm thinking heyho, let's see what I can do.
To try and avoid their content being considered duplicate by search engines, they were using link tags pointing to alternates with hreflang pointing to language codes, for example en_GB, en_US to point to their respective UK and US sites on each of their pages on each of their subdomains, where relevant.
This wasn't completely new to me, but in terms of internationalised sites was a little alien because the approach I took with Drupal was different.
Nevertheless, I looked into it, and decided their approach was wrong. Because their situation was region-centric and not language-centric.
I tried to explain that to them, that while yes it's possible to specify a region alongside a language, it indicates a regional variant of a language, not a language and the region which you are targeting. I.e. you could be speaking British English in the USA.
I was told I was wrong, that this was an industry standard way of approaching the situation, and that my understanding was dated.
The next day I was fired because apparently my SEO technical understanding wasn't up to scratch.
You know when you think surely what I said was right but you doubt yourself?! Would appreciate any thoughts, was I right? ☹️
The definition of hreflang says it uses BCP47 tags, which clearly defines region subtags as regional linguistic variations.
This says you're technically correct on the semantics of hreflang; it doesn't say anything about whether you're correct on the way it is used as standard in the SEO industry (on which I have no insight).
I don't know about SEO, but the way that I would target sites to different regions would be by using IP address, and rather than having different sites (which would be harder to maintain anyway), I would use translation functionality (e.g. Angular Translate) to target them to regions. The different sites could also convert between currencies, or get prices by region, once the IP address has been detected. So their entire approach is wrong.
And I agree that en-GB is meant to target speakers of British English, who may be anywhere, not the region where en-GB is the majority language.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
Is there any close or best open source solutions as Google's Invisible reCAPTCHA V2? And also as Google's regular reCAPTCHA V2(checkbox one)?
SecurImage or phpcaptcha is open source alternative to Google reCaptcha v2. But I don't think there's any alternative to the Invisible reCaptcha yet. You can refer to This for some good alternatives for reCaptcha v2 (though most of them are not open source).
I have yet to find any pre-assembled free code implementations, but my favourite suggestions so far for replacing reCaptcha is the honeypot technique. The concept is that webmasters add fields to their forms that are invisible to human users, but visible to bots. When bots fill in these invisible fields, they reveal that they're not human, and the forms can be safely discarded. More details here:
http://ezinearticles.com/?Captchas-Considered-Harmful---Why-Captchas-Are-Bad-And-How-You-Can-Do-Better&id=1104207
... and some discussion of implementation here:
https://www.thryv.com/blog/honeypot-technique/
I like this because of the way it shifts the burden of proof. Instead of requiring users to perform annoying extra tasks to prove they are human, they are presumed to be human, unless they reveal themselves to be bots. Also, 'are you a human' captchas, are known to make it difficult (if not impossible) for some special needs users to access websites, so this is another good reason to find a replacement for them.
There are definitely much better solutions than reCAPTCHA out there now. I like solutions that focus on user experience. Another great option I don’t see listed here is Human Presence. Human Presence uniquely analyzes user behavior invisibly in the background on your site and determines whether the user is human or bot using proprietary machine learning algorithms to measure the user's actual behavior across dozens of different data points...keyboard strokes, mouse movements, micro gestures, etc.
The best part is that real users on a website are never punished with turing tests like CAPTCHAs or math problems. The Human Presence API can be configured to check the session and make sure the user is human before processing forms, comments, wishlists, shopping carts, or even page loads so that only bots are blocked but legitimate users continue on about their business as without any knowledge of the technology.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I know that <meta name="Description" content="[description here]" /> can be used but I wonder how to make a description like the one in facebook.
Does this description use the <meta> tag as well? Or is there some other secret behind it?
Edit: I code my site by myself (no wordpress and stuff) :)
I believe this is how it happens.
Google primarily displays multi link listings when they feel a query
has a strong chance of being navigational in nature. I think they can
determine that something is navigational in nature based on linkage
data and click streams. If the domain is well aligned with the term
that could be another signal to consider.
If you have 10,000 legit links for a term that nobody else has more
than a few dozen external citations for then odds are pretty good that
your site is the official brand source for that term. I think overall
relevancy as primarily determined by link reputation is the driving
factor for weather or not they post mini site map links near your
domain.
This site ranks for many terms, but for most of them I don't get the
multi link map love. For the exceptionally navigational type terms
(like seobook or seo book) I get multi links.
The mini site maps are query specific. For Aaron Wall I do not get the
mini site map. Most people usually refer to the site by it's domain
name instead of my name.
Google may also include subdomains in their mini sitemaps. In some
cases they will list those subdomains as part of the mini site map and
also list them in the regular search results as additional results.
Michael Nguyen put together a post comparing the mini site maps to
Alexa traffic patterns. I think that the mini site maps may roughly
resemble traffic patterns, but I think the mini links may also be
associated with internal link structure.
For instance, I have a sitewide link to my sales letter page which I
use the word testimonials as the anchor text. Google lists a link to
the sales letter page using the word testimonials.
When I got sued the page referencing the lawsuit got tons and tons of
links from many sources, which not only built up a ton of linkage
data, but also sent tons of traffic to that specific page. That page
was never listed on the Google mini site map, which would indicate
that if they place heavy emphasis on external traffic or external
linkage data either they try to smooth the data out over a significant
period of time and / or they have a heavy emphasis on internal
linkage.
My old site used to also list the monthly archives on the right side
of each page, and the February 2004 category used to be one of the
mini site map links in Google.
You should present the pages you want people to visit the most to
search bots the most often as well. If you can get a few extra links
to some of your most important internal pages and use smart channeling
of internal linkage data then you should be able to help control which
pages Google picks as being the most appropriate matches for your mini
site map.
Sometimes exceptionally popular sites will get mini site map
navigational links for broad queries. SEO Chat had them for the term
SEO, but after they ticked off some of their lead moderators they
stopped being as active and stopped getting referenced as much. The
navigational links may ebb and flow like that on broad generic
queries. For your official brand term it may make sense to try to get
them, but for broad generic untargeted terms in competitive markets
the amount of effort necessary to try to get them will likely exceed
the opportunity cost for most webmasters.
Source.
Hope this helps.
It depends on the website popularity.
Google does it, you don't.
Google may do it but you can persuade them.And check this out sub sitelinks in google search result
For starters, be sure you have a “sitemap.xml” file. This is a file
that tells the search engine about the pages on your site and makes
it easier for its spiders to crawl and understand it. Your
webmaster or website provider or Content Management System (like
WordPress) should have handled this for you, but it’s worth
checking. If you’re not a master of website technical stuff,
whoever is your technical support person will be able to tell you if
that page is there, and properly set up.
You should register your site with Google Webmaster Tools, if you
haven’t already. The exact process changes from time to time, but
basically, you’ll give Google the URL of your Sitemap file, which
you’ll have from the previous step. You’ll have to put a “Site
Verification Code” on your site to prove to them that you own the
site, and there are a few other simple steps.
Whenever you link one page to another in your site, use anchor text
and alt text that’s descriptive, and as succinct as possible, and
consistent. For example, you’ve linked to your “concierge services”
page from another page using the anchor text “concierge services.”
That’s perfect. Now, don’t link from another page using “guest
services.” You don’t want to be confusing the poor Google spider,
after all.
Searching Stackoverflow on Google I get this result:
Inspecting the HTML source of the Stack Overflow frontpage I can't find any reference of
"A language-indipendent collaboratively edited question and answer site for programmers" stuff.
I thought it was something related to meta description, but it is not true.
Also, where are the Log In, Questions, Ask Question etc. declared? Sitemap.xml?
In few words, could I obtain the same result simply editing my web site content, or is it something configured on some Google webmaster panel?
When the search engines try to determine which content they should use for the snippet showed in the search results, they take a look at two things:
Meta description tag
Content on the page
Because the goal of the search engines is to show a snippet that is as informative and useful for the searchers as possible, the search engines will first evaluate the meta description tag trying to determine how relevant this description is to the keywords (search terms) used by the searcher in his query. A very straightforward indication of relevance is the presence of any of those keywords in the meta description tag. If the meta description is not present or it is determined to be irrelevant to the query performed, the search engines will try to pull content from the page and use it as the snippet for the search results. This behavior is true for several search engines such as Bing (and by extension for Yahoo!, whose search results are powered by Bing), Ask.com, etc.
Ok, let's now take a look at Google's search results for the query "stack overflow":
Stack Overflow
A language-independent collaboratively edited question and answer site for programmers.
stackoverflow.com
As we can see, the snippet includes the following text: "A language-independent collaboratively edited question and answer site for programmers." Surprisingly enough, this line of text doesn't appear in neither the meta description (which is actually missing from the page), nor in the content of Stack Overflow's homepage. Where did that line of text come from then?
Here's the answer: Google and AOL evaluate a third source of information to determine the search result snippet of a page: the DMOZ directory. DMOZ is an open content directory, which includes links to millions of websites, organized by category. Let's do a search for Stack Overflow on DMOZ:
Stack Overflow - A language-independent collaboratively edited question and answer site for programmers.
As we can see, Stack Overflow is listed on DMOZ and its description its being used by Google and AOL to populate the snippet.
If we try the same search for Yahoo! (or Bing), this is what we obtain:
Stack Overflow
Stack Overflow. Questions; Tags; Users; Badges; Unanswered. Ask Question. Top Questions active 171 featured hot week month
Because the meta description tag is missing from Stack Overflow's homepage, and because Yahoo! doesn't use the DMOZ directory as an extra source of information, the only thing that Yahoo! has left is to pull content from the page, with poor results.
Instead of blaming Yahoo!, however, it is Stack Overflow's fault not to have included a meta description tag on their homepage, which would allow them to have more control over what gets displayed in the search results. Remember that the snippet has a strong influence in the Click Through Rate (CTR), which is the percentage of searchers that clicked on Stack Overflow's link from the search results page. Common sense says that it's more likely for someone to click on a descriptive snippet than to click on a snippet that reads "Stack Overflow. Questions; Tags; Users; Badges; Unanswered. Ask Question. Top Questions active 171 featured hot week month".
Finally, regarding the sitelinks, and as David Dorward mentioned, those links are automatically generated by Google and the only control that the webmaster has over them is to decide whether he wants to block them or not. There are a few factors that Google considers when determining if your website deserves to receive sitelinks: link structure/site architecture of your site, number of inbound links to your landing pages, anchor text of those links, traffic coming from Google's search results directly to your landing pages, etc.
The description is just content extracted from the page.
The links aren't under the control of authors.
Just provide semantic markup, as usual (i.e. make sure your navigation is expressed as lists of links, and so on), and hope that Google decides you are important enough to be worth adding those links.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm looking for an existing library to summarize or paraphrase content (I'm aiming at blog posts) - any experience with existing natural language processing libraries?
I'm open to a variety of languages, so I'm more interested in the abilities & accuracy.
There was some discussion of Grok. This is now supported as OpenCCG, and will be reimplemented in OpenNLP as well.
You can find OpenCCG at http://openccg.sourceforge.net/. I would also suggest the Curran and Clark CCG parser available here: http://svn.ask.it.usyd.edu.au/trac/candc/wiki
Basically, for paraphrase, what you're going to need to do is write up something that first parses sentences of blog posts, extracts the semantic meaning of these posts, and then searches through the space of vocab words which will compositionally create the same semantic meaning, and then pick one that doesn't match the current sentence. This will take a long time and it might not make a lot of sense. Don't forget that in order to do this, you're going to need near-perfect anaphora resolution and the ability to pick up discourse-level inferences.
If you're just looking to make blog posts that don't have machine-identifiable duplicate content, you can always just use topic and focus transformations and WordNet synonyms. There have definitely been sites which have made money off of AdWords that have done this before.
I think he wants to generate blog posts by automatically paraphrasing whatever was it the blogs this system is monitoring.
This would be really interesting if you could combine 2 to 10 blog posts that are similar, but from different sources and then do a paraphrased "real" summary automatically (the size of 1 blog post).
It could also be great for Homeworks. Unfortunately it's not that easy to do.
The only way I could see is to be able to decompose every sentence into "meaning", and then randomly change the sentence structure and some words retaining the meaning.
These sentences mean the same:
I hate this guy, he is so dumb.
This guy is stupid, I hate him.
I despise this dumb guy.
He is dumb, I hate him.
It would be nontrivial to write a program to transform one of these sentences to the others, and these are simple sentences, real sentences from blogs are much more complicated.
Your getting into really far out AI type domain. I have done extensive work in text transformation into machine knowledge mainly using Attempto Controlled English (see: http://attempto.ifi.uzh.ch/site/), it is a natural language (english) that is completely computer processable into several different ontologies, such as OWLDL.
Seems like that would we way overkill though...
Is there a reason for not just taking the first few sentences of your blog post and then appending an ellipse for your summary?
Thanks for those links. Looks like GROK is dead - but it may work still for my purposes.
2 more links:
http://classifier4j.sourceforge.net/
http://www.corporasoftware.com/products/summarize.aspx
The Attempto Controlled English is an interesting concept: as it's a completely reverse way of looking at the problem. Not really practical for what I am trying to do.
#mmattax As for the suggestion of taking a few sentences - I'm not trying to present a summary: otherwise that would be a nice judo solution. I'm looking to actually summarize the content to use for other evaluation purposes.