Addding for tonight`s Dumb SEO Questions Hangout on Air #49.+Rob Wagner
said: "It would seem that everyone should have gotten the message at this point. Low quality content will not help a site rank better. +Matt Cutts video talks about rolling Panda into the process of indexing and what to look for if you are not ranking as well as you think you should.
This video reminded me that now is as good of time as any to review +Amit Singhal`s post titled "More guidance on building high-quality sites". http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2011/05/more-guidance-on-building-high-quality.html
The article has 23 bullet points. What do you think would happen if someone concentrated on 1 point each day until you covered all 23? Do you think that after 23 days you would end up with a better site? I may just make this into a 23 day challenge for myself just to see what happens.
Here are the Bullet points
1. Would you trust the information presented in this article?
2. Is this article written by an expert or enthusiast who knows the topic well, or is it more shallow in nature?
3. Does the site have duplicate, overlapping, or redundant articles on the same or similar topics with slightly different keyword variations?
4. Would you be comfortable giving your credit card information to this site?
5. Does this article have spelling, stylistic, or factual errors?
6. Are the topics driven by genuine interests of readers of the site, or does the site generate content by attempting to guess what might rank well in search engines?
7. Does the article provide original content or information, original reporting, original research, or original analysis?
8. Does the page provide substantial value when compared to other pages in search results?
9. How much quality control is done on content?
10. Does the article describe both sides of a story?
11. Is the site a recognized authority on its topic?
12. Is the content mass-produced by or outsourced to a large number of creators, or spread across a large network of sites, so that individual pages or sites don’t get as much attention or care?
13. Was the article edited well, or does it appear sloppy or hastily produced?
14. For a health related query, would you trust information from this site?
15. Would you recognize this site as an authoritative source when mentioned by name?
16. Does this article provide a complete or comprehensive description of the topic?
17. Does this article contain insightful analysis or interesting information that is beyond obvious?
18. Is this the sort of page you’d want to bookmark, share with a friend, or recommend?
19. Does this article have an excessive amount of ads that distract from or interfere with the main content?
20. Would you expect to see this article in a printed magazine, encyclopedia or book?
21. Are the articles short, unsubstantial, or otherwise lacking in helpful specifics?
22. Are the pages produced with great care and attention to detail vs. less attention to detail?
23. Would users complain when they see pages from this site?"