Rewritten site review 2

[petermeachem]

I would really appreciate your views on my company's rewritten site

http://www.duncton.com

which was designed very much with seo in mind.
I have an extensive list of horrors and would like some back up before I go off the deep end with various managers.
As a starting point, I found it well worth time googling for Duncton and felt the page structure was just a bit lacking. Do feel free to apply for finance. Owing to a slight technical issue all emails from proposals end up in my gmail account rather than where they are supposed to be.

 

[johnwm]

Wasn't rewritten recently by the look of it as you use HTML3.2 and a fully table layout! However I find the general visual appearance to be attractive.

You don't seem to be using any hierarchical <h> tabs, just a single <h1> then only using <h3> for prices, not for section headers.

Your company name doesn't appear until almost the bottom of the page, except for alt text

If you want a full SEO critique you may do better in forum828

___________________________________________________________
If you want the best response to a question, please check out FAQ222-2244 first.
'If we're supposed to work in Hex, why have we only got A fingers?'
Drive a Steam Roller
Steam Engine Prints

 

[petermeachem]

Last week actually.

They have put some redirects in now so google doesn't look so dreadful.

Thanks, I'll ask the seo forum

 

[ChrisHunt]

Like John says, not bad for a table-driven site. A few notes and pointers, in no particular order...
[ul]
[li]The first thing that drew my eye on the front page (well, I've actually only looked at the front page) is the blurry faces of the people on the strip of images across the top. Is there a reason for that? It looks weird to me.[/li]
[li]It would be nice to use real text instead of images for the menu across the top, you should be able to achieve a similar effect using CSS. Still, I'm glad to see you're using the correct [tt]alt[/tt] attributes on the menu images for those that can't see them.[/li]
[li]It would be good if the whole of the Our Cars/Apply Online/Finance Options link areas down the LHS were clickable, rather than just the title. I might try to click the little arrows or the brown text or the people (at least they're in focus this time!). This could easily accomplished using CSS and [tt]display:block[/tt] links.[/li]
[li]It's a personal pet hate, but I think the text size for the block of text in the middle of the screen is too small. You've got plenty of space to use a more comfortable size.[/li]
[li]Under the hood... You should really specify a full DOCTYPE (google for it), rather than the half one you're currently using. Be warned, you may need to change some code to stop your layout from breaking, but it will give you more consistent results across different browsers.[/li]
[li]This will not work:

<meta http-equiv="description" content="Duncton Specialist Vehicle Finance">
<meta http-equiv="keywords" content="Duncton Specialist Vehicle Finance">

You should be using [tt]name[/tt] instead of [tt]http-equiv[/tt] for description and keywords. [tt]http-equiv[/tt] is used to send extra http headers (which are better sent from the server if you can do so). Some of your other [tt]meta[/tt] elements are meaningless, but harmless.[/li]
[li]You're slightly over-using the [tt]alt[/tt] attribute. The intention is to provide alternative content for those who cannot see the images. In general, if the image contains text, the [tt]alt[/tt] should just be the text - for example, the [tt]alt[/tt] for your logo should be "Duncton", not "Duncton Logo" in my view. If I can't see it, why would I care whether it's a logo or just the word? If the image has no value other than decoration, use a [tt]alt=""[/tt]. I'd use this on the "tick" images down the left hand side - if I can't see them, I don't need to know about them.[/li]
[li]Table-based layout is a bit twentieth century, but I've seen a lot worse.[/li]
[/ul]
All in all, fairly minor stuff, with the exception of the lack of a full DOCTYPE. I didn't spot any stand-out SEO no-nos, though I'm sure there's stuff you can improve in that department (Isn't there always?)

Do you work in that converted barn? It looks really nice.

-- Chris Hunt
Webmaster & Tragedian
Extra Connections Ltd

 

[petermeachem]

Chris thank you, I really appreciate your input. The site was done by a 3rd party for us, and I think they should have done a lot better personally.

Yes, we work in the barn and have another site in an old railway station. The barn is fantastic, dated to 1498 and a pleasure to be in. Nicest place I've ever worked.

Peter

 

[BigRed1212]

IE6/Win XP, I get a blank white page at duncton.com.

 

[petermeachem]

That's odd, I've just checked the same combination here, works fine

 

[BabyJeffy]

The other guys have said most of the important stuff.

I noticed that in IE6 you are displaying alpha transparency PNG images - but they are not being handled by a filter (and so you see a light blue background where the image ought to be transparent).

The image is: url(../graphics/home/homeflash.png)

There are some examples in the FAQ section in the HTML forum on dealing with this. If you need some help, let us know.

Cheers,
Jeff

[tt]Jeff's Blog [!]@[/!] CodeRambler

http://www.coderambler.com/

http://www.coedit.co.uk/

[/tt]

Make sure your web page and css validates properly against the doctype you have chosen - before you attempt to debug a problem!

FAQ216-6094

 

[BigRed1212]

I see "homeflash" in the above. Didn't know it was Flash. If it is, I probably can't see it. I have 9.0.47.0

If I view source on the blank page I see the only code I get is:

<meta http-equiv="refresh" content="0; url=index.jsp">

 

[BabyJeffy]

No - the file is a PNG file that has that name. It's the light brown circle with prices in the right column. Look at it in IE6 under Windows and notice the light blue part.

Totally unrelated - but get to adobe.com and upgrade that flash install asap (the security fixes to the latest version are critical to your computer's well being).

Cheers,
Jeff

[tt]Jeff's Blog [!]@[/!] CodeRambler

http://www.coderambler.com/

http://www.coedit.co.uk/

[/tt]

Make sure your web page and css validates properly against the doctype you have chosen - before you attempt to debug a problem!

FAQ216-6094

 

[BigRed1212]

but get to adobe.com and upgrade that flash install asap

Love to, but not an option. I take what they give with no admin priviledges.

 

[petermeachem]

On the front page you click on the car and not the price bubble, on the Our Cars page it's the other way round.
Non of the pages have a decent description or keywords tag.
I don't like the title either, it's not Specialist Vehicle Finance, it's any old vehicle for people who can't get finance, more like Vehicle Specialist Finance.
On the front page on the left there is a picture of some bod, a hyperlink that goes to Our cars and some text. I think all should be hyperlinks, I hate playing hunt the link.
I have read that page links like index.jsp?lnk=200 and so on were not particularly good from an seo view, or is that an urban legend.
I'm not that chuffed it is in jsp either considering I will be maintaining it. They might have picked something I actually knew.
I don't like the way the data validation is done on the Application Form at all. a) It doesn't tell which fields you have to fill in b) You get a message box one at a time per error c) Message box language is not straightforward. If you play with this, please don't Submit, sales will get all excited.
Clicking the Duncton logo doesn't take you back to the front page.
I don't think there is actually a print.css file
The hyperlink for the cars is the car description. That's not going to work at all when there are two cars of the same type is it.
I know it is only easily fixed things and it is much better than the previous version so hopefully it will be sorted promptly.
We do have some cool cars though!

 

[BabyJeffy]

I take what they give with no admin priviledges.

Then, as a professional, you have an obligation to your employers to make them aware of the fact that there are some significant security vulnerabilities with the current version of Flash they have installed, and that they should roll out a company-wide update with haste.

Many of us work in similar environments and it is no reason to remain silent.

Cheers,
Jeff

[tt]Jeff's Blog [!]@[/!] CodeRambler

http://www.coderambler.com/

http://www.coedit.co.uk/

[/tt]

Make sure your web page and css validates properly against the doctype you have chosen - before you attempt to debug a problem!

FAQ216-6094

 

[ChrisHunt]

I have read that page links like index.jsp?lnk=200 and so on were not particularly good from an seo view, or is that an urban legend.

Not exactly a legend, but still a tale of long ago. Once upon a time search engines were (allegedly) suspicious of URLs with query strings in them, thinking that they might be search results or other things that they wouldn't want to index. These days, with so much of the web being delivered through content management systems of one sort or another, such a position would be untenable.

Look at any old set of search results and you'll see plenty of top-ranking ones loaded with supposedly SEO-unfriendly query strings. It may well be that you'd like (some of) your URLs to be more friendly to people, but it's not an issue for search engines.

-- Chris Hunt
Webmaster & Tragedian
Extra Connections Ltd

 

[MikeBarone]

Nice site!

The only thing I do not like is the blurred faces in the masthead.

-
Mike

http://www.cgiscript.net

FREE CGI/Perl/JavaScripts

 

[petermeachem]

Getting there isn't it. That's an old picture, I don't know why they are blurred, if it was a picture of me blurring would be essential.

 

[roshaoar]

It's not all that great as an SEO'd site. Looks like it's done by someone who knows the basics but isn't a "guru" as such.

 

[ChrisHunt]

So, roshaoar, care to share some of your guru-like wisdom on what Peter's site is lacking?

-- Chris Hunt
Webmaster & Tragedian
Extra Connections Ltd

 

[roshaoar]

Not sure where to start., I'll just comment on the homepage (hp). First of all the hp title - the strongest page in the site - if you want to rank for the search term "vehicle finance" you'd start with those words, not duncton. Is vehicle finance even the v best term to shoot for - has proper keyword analysis been done with the usual tools. It's usining images rather than text on the top tabs - text is better for a variety of reasons. The biggest image on the page has a meaningless alt tag ("header"). Keywords and description are in there twice, trying to trick an angine, a waste of time. Keywords not even used by Europe's biggest search engine anymore except to penalise (-G-). revisit-after is a waste of time used just by an obscure Canadian search engine. I've never yet see google analytics used like that in a header maybe that's just me though. The structure is weird - base href is

http://www.duncton.com/jsp/

yet everything calls ../, stuff like "<a href>Poor credit history?<br>We can help</br>" is v. silly for seo, and the urls they point to arent even rewritten. Why use H3s for the price? Better used as content header. Every par of the text should have the target phrase in it, in bold too. Again all the links to the cars are not rewritten URLs, and they're referred to as autos. In England people say "car" =).

That's just the hp. There are a lot of other factors to consider, far too many to waffle on about here =). Bottom line is yes it'll score on some stuff, but as a pro seo job it's in the 6/10 category rather than 9/10

 

[petermeachem]

They (the vendors) have been told that http-equiv is wrong. I have also pointed out that it is probably better not to use header tags than to use them wrongly. The Auto is as in Automatic not as in car.
Thanks for your comments.