Comments on: FINALLY: Why Squidoo Tags Are Useless

By: Roo

Roo — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 20:37:11 +0000

WApinoy, I think the thing that you are up against here is the sheer number of people promoting WA, if you just search squidoo you will find hundreds of (not very good) lenses on the subject. Also, if you don;t have any backlinks you’re not going to get any traffic for this subject, no matter what Tags or Keywords you use.

By: WApinoy

WApinoy — Tue, 13 Jan 2009 02:01:03 +0000

I have research enough for the keywords I used in my lens about Wealthy Affiliate. I had tweak them several times and even added some more tags. But still, my traffic is still close to zero. And maybe this is the reason why I am still getting a very small traffic to my lens. I am asking the same question on why would Squidoo not want Google to find us? And you are right about the Squidoo Search bar. Viewers would prefer clicking back to Google or Yahoo Search bar instead of using Squidoo’s. What’s in for us now?

By: jooloo

jooloo — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 09:19:52 +0000

Oh my, more problems. I just start to get the hang of things and Google or Squidoo changes them. Keeps everyone on their toes.

By: Alethea Spain

Alethea Spain — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 19:26:46 +0000

and also, maybe the reason Squidoo are doing in this is because they have capitalised on the many people who want to make money from home, online and are planning to take Google on in the future?

By: Alethea Spain

Alethea Spain — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 19:24:54 +0000

Call me old fashioned but the concept of “classified” avertising ie search criteria is that you can find what you want, easily quickly and use it time and time again because it’s trusted ie; quality – why not put specific related tags in,? am I missing something here?

By: Susanna Duffy

Susanna Duffy — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 08:26:15 +0000

We all stopped using meta tags at least a year ago (although I still faithfully write them into my HTML pages) but it all seems just a waste of time to add them into Squidoo. As for building lenses that are related to each other, I assumed everyone would do that?

By: allan

allan — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 16:08:14 +0000

I’ve read reports that used no-follow links with a long nonsense word to a page without the word. The target page did eventually show on search results for that word. Google writes their own rules (and changes them) for how their robots will act; at least at the time of the reports they seemed to follow, but did not weigh.

By: daria369

daria369 — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 20:11:32 +0000

I’m really glad I read that – thank you so much for explaining it all!

By: bbug

bbug — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 00:34:08 +0000

Food for thought, thanks for the information.

By: Always Juggling » Blog Archive » I finally got that new lens published….

Wed, 15 Oct 2008 16:14:10 +0000

[...] off quite a debate about how Google does not recognise tags on Squidoo anymore on his blog at: SquidooCool. I don’t begin to understand the whys and wherefores about this….deep sigh! But as far [...]

By: Squidoo Tags Are Useless? Really? I Have To Disagree | PotPieGirl.com

Squidoo Tags Are Useless? Really? I Have To Disagree | PotPieGirl.com — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 00:56:43 +0000

[...] FINALLY: Why Squidoo Tags Are Useless [...]

By: cchiovitti

cchiovitti — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 19:26:38 +0000

It seems like many of my lenses are actually getting quite a bit of traffic via the discovery tool, so I still think about how I can get the most bang for my buck from tags, but for search engines, I just try and keep important keywords at the forefront of my module titles, subtitles, and text (without overdoing it of course).

By: Adrian Lee

Adrian Lee — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 16:53:19 +0000

Wow! Like Veronica said, Why on earth would Squidoo not want Google to find the lens?
Just when Squidoo started making sense to me, something else turns up.

Good post! Thanks.

By: Mike

Mike — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 16:33:13 +0000

Thanks for the informative post.

What reason would squidoo have for doing this? Doesn’t make sense to me???

Also wondering about how squidoo is set to use nofollow and dofollow. Is it true that they switched several times now, and currently dofollow links on your lenses?

I believe with hubpages, you earn dofollow by having a certain number of hubs with a certain threshold score on those. Does squidoo do something similar?

Again, thanks for the tip here!
Mike

By: Networking Woman

Networking Woman — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 16:15:10 +0000

Thanks ,
I posted a link to your post on Twitter, for my Squidoo Networking Women Group followers , 40 tags – what a waste of time it was…

Thanks a lot,

By: aj2008

aj2008 — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 12:51:05 +0000

Oh great! And to think I was feeling I was getting to grips with “tagging”. So how does Google find us then? Is it when we post the URL to Google, Yahoo etc? I have at least one lens that gets more Google traffic than Squidoo traffic.

So what were Squidoo’s reasons for “nixing” tags?

I am confused – deep sigh!

By: katinka - spirituality

katinka - spirituality — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 07:36:36 +0000

This post would be just a tad bit better if it gave credit to the lensmasters who wrote about this before. First of all TheFluffanutta reported this on his blog at least a month ago. I wrote about it myself on my SEO for squidoo lens as well.

The reason why squidoo doesn’t want tag pages indexed is clear: google made it clear that they don’t want search results indexed. And squidoo wisely decided to obey googles instructions (because not obeying can lead to penalties and we all want to be found in google)

By: Violeta

Violeta — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 00:11:10 +0000

Very helpful information! Could you please add the link for the following sentences: “Joe does this brilliantly. Check out his lenses here.”?

By: john metso

john metso — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 23:46:42 +0000

yes i think lantor(l!a!n!t!o!r)word is better in i.
thanks

By: john metso

john metso — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 23:19:32 +0000

I will continue to use them,but thinks to your article i wont put a whole lot of effort into researching tags.all of my lens can to see google.

Thanks for your efforts.