I don't think the size really matters but the most content you have is always better for SEO purposes.
I remember me some quote from Tim that a page doesn't have to be too that big. But maybe the thread starter not to give us an example (just to be sure)
Tim Nash
Global Moderator Community Supporter?
Internet Junkie
Posts: 2173
5036 credits Members referred : 2
Venture Skills - New Media & IT group
« Reply #3 on: Jun 06, 2007, 10:33:48 AM »
its not really the size of the page but the content on it. Most of the big engines strip out the navigation and common elements when determining what content is on the page, some however do have a scales so if you imagine placing all your non unique page content in one end of the scale and unique content many engine penalise if they don't balance or the unique is greater.
a good rules of thumb is 500/2/3 so for 500 words you should include 2 outgoing links with 3 targeted keywords.
Now big pages suffer from content overload but we are talking 1000s of words here so if your page has between 500-3000 words it should be fine
Their are exceptions to all these rules for example Digg suffers from having on many pages limited content and very few on keyword based content (unless your ranking for obscenities) How google and co cope with these style sites seems to contradict the above method, but I guess the number of inbound links to Digg passes a lot of weight to any post along with normally targeted titles.
Bill Gates is my home boy
Gender:
Posts: 622
3877 credits Members referred : 2
« Reply #5 on: Jun 06, 2007, 09:37:59 PM »
What about the ratio of content to code? I've seen some conversations where excessive code or pushing the core content too far down the html can hurt SEO efforts.
What about the ratio of content to code? I've seen some conversations where excessive code or pushing the core content too far down the html can hurt SEO efforts.
yes right I remember the time that websites are poisoned by DW with a lof of Javascript code