Glad to know everyone has made up (or didn’t need to!).

well, that status is visible in the article itself and is a sign of quality. It is also the status before “featured article”, which is the highest quality status an article can get. At that moment does it also become part of the rotation for being featured at the Wikipedia homepage.

Only 1,683 articles (1/1240) have the status of “featured article” and 3,102 articles (1/673) have the status of “good article” at the moment.

That says something, doesn’t it?

Is that a big deal? I can still find it in their search.

> I salvaged your Affiliate Summit logo btw.

Thanks

I first thought that it is an artificial word, but Babylon (Babylon.com, my translator since 1995, they have an affiliate program with CJ) states.

Tithe

n. tenth part; tenth part of one’s income paid as a tax for the support of religious institutions

v. pay a tenth of one’s income to support the Church; collect taxes equalling one-tenth of each person’s income to support the Church

The article failed “good article” status btw. One editor was okay with it, but another wasn’t. The other guy has some valid points, but some are also a bit… mmh.. off. You can find the link to the comments of the review at the articles talk page. I tweaked already some of it.. the parts that made also sense to me.

I salvaged your Affiliate Summit logo btw. It was deleted, because it lagged a fair use rationale. I uploaded a new logo and updated it properly.

Cheers!

By the way, I just noticed that a definition I submitted a while ago to Urban Dictionary is now live (and you’re part of it):

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Info+Tithe

http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3aaffiliatething%2ecom

I have my doubt that those indexed links do you much good. Too bad that Google does not show anymore, if a page is “supplemental” or not. I would bet that most of them are.

>Plus, I don’t think many people are tying it in.

Hard to tell, but it would be good for branding purposes for sure and you might get additional traffic from it, if you put a supplemental blog up for it as well. Basically instead of posting it here that a new episode is available. You might even want to get transscripts for the podcast episodes, which would increase the content and value even more. Transscripting gets cheaper and cheaper nowadays.

> I didn’t say that – I see SEO as work, and I write my blog for enjoyment.

That’s right, Sam said that. But honestly, SEO is less work than you might think. If you just do a few things automatically and get used to, it’s actually pretty easy. You don’t compete in a too competitive niche and have a clear advantage because of the age and trust your top level domain has established over the years. That’s already a big chunk of the puzzle others, who do not have that advantage, have to compensate for by working harder on other factors.

We can chat about it at Affiliate Summit a bit, if you like to.

p.s. I am no professional SEO myself, but use the basics for my own purposes, because why would I want to miss out on the opportunity to get free and target traffic (even if it is for my hobby sites I maintain for fun or other non-commercial reasons).

I also follow things that happen in this space out of curiosity and because I got hit by Google once without trying to game Google and only concentrating on the sites content and value for the user. I would not have been hit out of the blue that bad, if I would have known more about what was going on in the SEO space at the time.

We couldn’t come up with a name we liked, and ended up with this one, since nobody else had the domain.

Anyhow, I’ve got a database around it and lots of indexed links from the pages of that database.

Plus, I don’t think many people are tying it in.

> But SEO is BS, right?

I didn’t say that – I see SEO as work, and I write my blog for enjoyment.

Haha.. hey it isn’t that bad. I only have a weird sense of it okay?!

> AskShawnCollins.com is nothing but a form – I don’t lose sleep over it’s lack of a presence for my name.

No reason to, but it would take very little to take another spot in the top 10 with that domain. Without the need to work hard and sweat for it. It’s better than that “hacked site”, isn’t it?

> And my directory was at AffiliateThing.com before the podcast existed

really? So did the name for the podcast come from this? Anyhow. I would suggest to point it to a page about the show and podcast with link to the RSS etc. Wouldn’t you agree that this makes sense now? I believe your show is more popular than the directory (and better known as
“Affiliate Thing”.. funny that you referred to the directory as “thing” heheh)

p.s. the other keywords (except for internet marketing) are less volume, but much more targeted. Since they are also less competitive, is it also easier to rank for them. If you start with targeting “Affiliate Marketing”, which is harder, you could “get” the other ones fairly easy as secondary keyphrases. But SEO is BS, right?

I go to your site directly and perform sometimes a site search only, but I am a returning visitor who knows your site. But not everybody does yet. A little bit SEO does not hurt to cover some more ground at the search engines, especially if it is for keywords that are right on target.

> I also wanted to point out important terms he should rank in the top 10 for, but does not.

I did find your list of terms where I should rank to be fairly comical.

Outside of affiliate, affiliate marketing, and affiliate program, the search volume for other terms is pretty negligible.

> Shawn should look into, e.g. AskShawnCollins.com and Affiliatething.com.

I currently have the top 3 and 7 of the top 10 results for my name.

AskShawnCollins.com is nothing but a form – I don’t lose sleep over it’s lack of a presence for my name.

And my directory was at AffiliateThing.com before the podcast existed.

Yes, he ranks #1 for “affiliate blog”, but not for “affiliate marketing blog”, which is funny, because “affiliate marketing blog” is obviously his main keyword phrase, based on the title tags used across his blog.

I hope this clears up things. Lisa, your comment is honorable. Not many people step up to defend others. I am sorry that you got a wrong idea about me because of my comment and hope that my 3 follow up comments put your anger at rest.

You should check out my free resources site, which is not my business. I make my money as affiliate in paid search primarily. The site pays for itself through affiliate links (if they are available) and a bit more than that, which allows me to use that extra money to support others in this industry, who provide IMO value and should be supported, such as Sam Harrelson or Fraser Edwards (who does not need that kind of help anymore).

You can check out the editorial note to learn more about the what, why and how.
http://www.cumbrowski.com/Editorial-Note.asp

Cheers!