"Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> __/ [Hymer] on Saturday 14 January 2006 17:48 \__
>> "Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>> __/ [Hymer] on Saturday 14 January 2006 16:00 \__
>>>> Hello Everyone,
>>>> I have a webpage that ranks in the top 5 in Google, Yahoo, and MSN for
>>>> primary keyword which is a very general term.
>>>> Now I want to optimize for a new keyword that is related to the primary
>>>> keyword but can be considered a new topic.
>>>> Is it better to add the new keyword to page getting the good rankings
>>>> create a new page just for that keyword?
>>>> Thanks a lot,
>>> Probably create another page and include both words in the title and
>>> peat them in the body (content). By doing so, you will at least not
>>> what you already have. The strong keyword from the main page will
>>> not propagate to the 'child page' though.
>>> [excuse a silly hypothetical example]
>>> A lot of emphasis is put on page titles, so if your main page was
>>> "dogs", your secondary page should be titled "domestic dogs".
>>> on its own means something else and will be assumed irrelevant based
>>> the page content. If the page mentions "dog" and "dogs" quite
>>> it could otherwise become a mismatch w.r.t. the title. That's my
>>> option, but it depends on the actual content in question and the
>>> tiveness over the search phrase/s.
>> Hi Roy,
>> Yes, that is what I was thinking also. Actually, my primary key phrase is
>> "user interface design." But I now want to do "usability." ...
> Hmmm... that's not contained in the phrase that you dominate already.
> the ideas are closely-correlated and content might have verbal overlap,
> indexes are not aware of this relationship. Stemming is the only
> but not synonyms, I suspect.
>> ...So it's not like
>> adding a term to what I already have (dog and domestic dog). Rather, it
>> would be more like dog and cat. I already have several modifying words
>> "user interface design" such as "user interface design consulting" which
>> 1 or 2 in Google. But this would be trying get people that search for
>> "usability" alone.
> Have you yet taken a look to see the top 10 in that SERP? It is worth
> checking if you can fit in that 'league'. I rarely ever fit anywhere among
> 1-word results pages, unless it involves a typo or arcane terms.
>> I think the principal still holds though. A new page would permit little
>> reference to "user interface design" and a lot of "usability" and
>> "usability testing."
>> Do you agree?
> In my humble opinion, in order to fit anywhere which is worthwhile, you
> have to work gard. For hot terminology (due to 'Web hype') such as
> "usability", you would need something on par with the scale of
> You would need many links which contain the word "usability" to point to
> brand new page. I can assure you that many blogs already point to
> pages /en masse/. Bloggers tend to write a lot about Web terminology
> why they have Web sites) and without looking up the term, I can imagine
> which sites should come up on top. I once found myself in number #47 for
> "roy" even though my page does not contain "roy" and neither do most of my
> inbound links. I've dropped to oblivion over time.
> Hope it helps,
Thanks Bill and Roy,
Right now, my blog which is part of the main site is about 60 in google for
"usability." But I don't have a separate page for usability. I think I can
prepare a page with lots of usability links (similar to my "user interface
design" page) that will attract some attention. And, I can get a lot of good
internal links from my PR6 pages. Plus I can publicize the new page in the
blog and probably get some relevant outside links.
I think it is worth a try. I don't see that it would hurt anything and over
time I could get in the top 10. Right now I know everyone that is there. A
few I will never beat like professional organizations but I think I have a
chance to get within the top 10 in about six months to a year.
I think I will give it a shot.