Thread: What improvements should be made to my website?

I finished making a website for a home inspector early last month. Although it isn't complete, as I required more information from the home inspector, it is as complete as I could have made it with the resources I had.

However, I have begun to notice ways to improve my work, and make my websites more user friendly and SE friendly. As such I want to add a favicon so people can identify which one of their possibly many open internet browser tabs is the one with the SureView home inspector website.

Also, I'd like my website to be inspected, any flaws that can be fixed, I want to know about them and how to fix them.

Much appreciation for the help.

how to add favicon ?

You will need to furnish the URL to the website before anyone can offer suggestions or assistance ...

BUT ... if it is www.abasementswaterproofingcontractors.ca I can offer you some initial insights:

INDEX PAGE

1. Major error with site at 1085 pixels wide for no apparent reason other than to accommodate overly large Font size on the page, both of which count dramatically against the site being "compliant" with the Models of acceptable build. Revise the width to no more than 960 pixels wide, as it will be at least another 18-24 months before the Rules relax to 1024 wide (based on the 16 pixel grid format). Consistent use of overly large font sizes tends to trigger a "spoof site" flag with the SE's, since there is no utility to adjust normal size fonts to a larger font: default cache size is 8-14 pt., the larger 12 and 14 pt. "tolerated" only for H-Tags and Contextual Structuring.

2. You have more than seven times the allowed number of Keywords entered, which is an immediate and persistent penalization for the site long after corrections are made (not only on the local ".ca" hub, but on the WWW also). Needless to say, less than five Keywords are actually anchored in your Page Content, and more than half of your Key Words/Phrases are improperly separated (there needs to be a space following each comma). Keep your Keywords to the "20/10 Rule": Twenty Key Words or Ten Key Phrases, All Anchored on the page in naturally composed text (not from 'Lists' as your "Cities Served" were sourced from, all un-anchored!).

3. Page Title is very weak as far as offering SEO value or ID of the site itself. How can this lopsided effort be justified? You would be better off simply using "Ashpark Basement Waterproofing Contractors in Ontario" keeping in mind the SE's value only 65 characters/spaces in Page Titles.

4. Page Description is more than twice as long as allowed, and only 3 words relate to Page Content, Title, and Navigation.

5. The "Visit Our Website" icon ion the header takes you to another website entirely, which makes it obvious you are creating a Directory in an omnibus "ashlandpark.ca" website to feature individual businesses. Not only is this a violation of VodaHost's Terms of Service (reselling hosting via proxy), the web page is such a hodge-podge of Blue Voda and CSS builds that it is not worth evaluating (you actually have 2 instances of Blue Voda page header coding and competing CSS page styles - what nonsense is that??) ..... it will never be of consequence with the Search engines built as it was. Two Blue Voda page codes?? Apparently you tried to copy code off a page file and save it as HTML. yes? Decide which website to promote, and then build it properly .... and remove the link: as of right now, this counts also as a "de-listing" offense due to "duplicate content" on the sites.

6. The background has nothing to do with the website and therefore does nothing to add to the site visually or with regard to optimization. In fact, use of red on black is much too "hot" a color for retail, and the record proves it to be a negative influence on conversion. Consider a more neutral color like the brick tans and clay siennas, or the concrete greys to "fit" better with "basements" and "leaks."

7. The syntax and grammar is unprofessional, and is definitively not composed with brevity and conversion in mind: it is an obvious attempt to 'tickle' the Search Engines, which they will easily identify and react to (in addition to the earlier, far more serious errors).

I could actually go on, without trying to be harsh or overly critical (honestly), but I think these mentions reflect a serious disconnect with Key Concepts that are so prominently underscored in these VodaTalk Forums and should be addressed fully and first.

You need to decide on how to be precise without being pretentious, IMO.
It is the only way to make progress that will produce positive results ... computers are very unforgiving, and it is best not to try to trick them, just appease them!


And ... you will need to officially demonstrate that you are in fact hosting your site at VodaHost and not reselling sites on the side to "clients" as you hint at.

Vulcan Mind Meld!

If Vasili url is correct. I would check your site in other browsers to avoid some overlaps.

LMAO, how did I forget to include the more important piece of information... The url is http://www.toronto-home-inspector.ca/index.php

Account referred to Security, as warned.

http://www.toronto-home-inspector.ca

Build is visually simple but unnecessarily rudimentary and sloppy (not balanced or precisely laid out, images poorly formatted), sorely obvious upon initial view, IMO. The rest below is not my opinion, but straight from a trustworthy tool, and seemingly backs up my Mantra and efforts to 'illuminate' everyone for so long now ...

1. CONSTRUCT: FAIL - site at 1050 is too wide.
2. ORGANIC: FAIL - spelling errors in critical core areas abound (Keywords, Navigation, Page Content).
3. CONTENT Composition: FAIL - less than 70% "natural" by analysis, not normal usage.
4. H-Tag Validation: FAIL - style non-conforming (h1=12pt, h2=10pt, h3=14pt, h5=11pt, h6=14pt) creating major conflict for data valuation.
5. META Analysis: FAIL
..a. Page Title: Barely Pass - 9 words of 10 allowable (65 character spaces)
..b. Page Description: Fail - too long (231 character spaces), spelling
..c. Key Words: Acceptable - 252 characters Passing; spelling errors Not Passing renders words useless
..d. HREF Title: FAIL - not present
..e. ROBOTS Tag: FAIL - not present
..f. LANGUAGE Tag: FAIL - not present
..g. AUTHOR Tag: FAIL - not present or not formatted properly
..h. COPYRIGHT Tag: FAIL - not present
..i. RE-VISIT Tag: FAIL - not present
..j. ALT Navigation: FAIL - links not valid, dead links present, no Error page present
..k. SITEMAP: FAIL - not present, not properly formatted; link improperly formatted
..l. METRICS: FAIL - 97% non-relevancy; useless, non-valued; Keywords/Phrases not validated current or prominent to consumer trends or Search Parameters

OVERALL STATUS: FAIL - site in this status is better offline than online, especially if Branding and long-term progress is sought for Domain (cached errors and penalties will outlast META efforts)

Sorry, but the tools only show it is what it is ... Basically, a lot to work on - from the ground up. Hope you aren't charging much.

Originally Posted by Vasili

Account referred to Security, as warned.

http://www.toronto-home-inspector.ca

Build is visually simple but unnecessarily rudimentary and sloppy (not balanced or precisely laid out, images poorly formatted), sorely obvious upon initial view, IMO. The rest below is not my opinion, but straight from a trustworthy tool, and seemingly backs up my Mantra and efforts to 'illuminate' everyone for so long now ...

1. CONSTRUCT: FAIL - site at 1050 is too wide.
2. ORGANIC: FAIL - spelling errors in critical core areas abound (Keywords, Navigation, Page Content).
3. CONTENT Composition: FAIL - less than 70% "natural" by analysis, not normal usage.
4. H-Tag Validation: FAIL - style non-conforming (h1=12pt, h2=10pt, h3=14pt, h5=11pt, h6=14pt) creating major conflict for data valuation.
5. META Analysis: FAIL
..a. Page Title: Barely Pass - 9 words of 10 allowable (65 character spaces)
..b. Page Description: Fail - too long (231 character spaces), spelling
..c. Key Words: Acceptable - 252 characters Passing; spelling errors Not Passing renders words useless
..d. HREF Title: FAIL - not present
..e. ROBOTS Tag: FAIL - not present
..f. LANGUAGE Tag: FAIL - not present
..g. AUTHOR Tag: FAIL - not present or not formatted properly
..h. COPYRIGHT Tag: FAIL - not present
..i. RE-VISIT Tag: FAIL - not present
..j. ALT Navigation: FAIL - links not valid, dead links present, no Error page present
..k. SITEMAP: FAIL - not present, not properly formatted; link improperly formatted
..l. METRICS: FAIL - 97% non-relevancy; useless, non-valued; Keywords/Phrases not validated current or prominent to consumer trends or Search Parameters

OVERALL STATUS: FAIL - site in this status is better offline than online, especially if Branding and long-term progress is sought for Domain (cached errors and penalties will outlast META efforts)

Sorry, but the tools only show it is what it is ... Basically, a lot to work on - from the ground up. Hope you aren't charging much.

I didn't charge much. He hasn't paid yet (although he wants it) so continual work has stopped.

How necessary is a language tag and what is a re-visit tag?

You can Google them and not only find out more, but how to create Tags that conform along with how to install them.
(Basically create them in Notepad properly and then paste them into the page file after it is on the server .... "update" the HTML file.)

Once in a while reports like this only underscore the importance of all I have been preaching in the corner all along. Too bad it happened to be your site, though (definitely not intentional), but hopefully everyone can learn how important it is to pay attention to details and what consequences small efforts (both good and bad) can create.