Re: Great Big Blood Bowl Survey
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2015 8:42 am
Interesting stuff about the sitemap, will definitely do that. With different titles for each page, I think Wordpress might scupper this, but will look into it.
Thanks.
Discuss Fantasy football-style board games - GW's Blood Bowl, Impact!'s Elfball, Privateer Press' Grind, Heresy's Deathball, etc. THIS IS NOT AN NFL FANTASY FOOTBALL SITE!
https://talkfantasyfootball.org/
Interesting stuff about the sitemap, will definitely do that. With different titles for each page, I think Wordpress might scupper this, but will look into it.
And yet it's on page 1 for me. Google searches are tailored to the searcher.Regash wrote:Well, I just typed "blood bowl" in the search box of google.
Mike, being no. 37 on the list is not good enough for the NAF!
OK, that's more helpful, thanks. A little surprising, but helpful!Regash wrote:Oh, you meant the comment about the site, not google.
Like I said, it might be just me.
The confusing part is that there is so much text and links on the frontpage.
As a Newbie, not even knowing what the NAF is, this seems to be to much information.
I'm not a professional webdesigner but I think a website has to LOOK interesting first to keep visitors on the site and then BE interesting to keep them coming back.
Know what I mean?
Also, it is quite uncomfortable to be a member to contact NTOs or RTOs.
Think about people who didn't even know that the NAF exists and now want information before becoming part of it.
The accessibility of the site is not very user friendly and is designed for people who know wht the NAF is and does.
Hope that clears up a little of what I mean.
That means what for someone who never even looked up the NAF?lunchmoney wrote:And yet it's on page 1 for me. Google searches are tailored to the searcher.
In what way is it surprising?sann0638 wrote:A little surprising, but helpful!
It is now!koadah wrote:It is No.20 for me. Bottom of page 2.
I did notice that the first reference to the NAF on the wikipedia page is not a link.
Whoops! Will see what we can do about that.koadah wrote: Blood bowl is not mentioned in the title on the NAF home page.
I thought there was a nice balance on the homepage of enough words to be descriptive, but not too many to be overwhelming. I quite like words though, so it's a subjective thing.Regash wrote:In what way is it surprising?
I'm not sure how the release of BB2 (and subsequent reviews of BB2 from sites way bigger than the NAF) pushing the NAF site down the ratings is Mike's fault.Regash wrote:Do I really need to spell out "Improve your search ratings!"
I never said that.Darkson wrote:I'm not sure how the release of BB2 pushing the NAF site down the ratings is Mike's fault.
Just tried that and "blood bowl NAF" brings the NAF site in as result one. "NAF" brings it in as result 4, behind something to do with horses.rolo wrote:you can see what a "neutral" user would see by going into porn mode, ah, "incognito" and doing your search. And the NAF is pretty far down on that list.
You're missing the point.lunchmoney wrote:Just tried that and "blood bowl NAF" brings the NAF site in as result one. "NAF" brings it in as result 4, behind something to do with horses.
why not a wikipedia page for the naf?sann0638 wrote:It is now!koadah wrote:It is No.20 for me. Bottom of page 2.
I did notice that the first reference to the NAF on the wikipedia page is not a link.