How to get more incoming links

I'm looking at the Crawl Errors from other web sites pointing to my Engineering Site. There must be 100 external links pointing to my site that are misspelled [some my have */ or other characters]. The incoming links point to about 40 different pages on my site. Many of the links appear to be copies of each other, as in 6 different web sites using the same bad web address. Some of the incoming links are from web forums or blogs which would explain why there are more than one different page using the same bad link. I still get the 404 page hit regardless, but I'll bet most people just click away.

But why would different web pages use invalid links, it just makes their page look inaccurate. In some cases it appears that a page is using my data but not really giving me proper credit, with an invalid link. You would think they would check their links.

Anyway it seems like Google is increasing their web directory, although I can't tell if these pages show up in a Google search. One forum posting was done in 2007, but Google indicates it was found in Nov of 2010 [Google uses the term Discovery Date]. Same thing for another page link, two incoming links were discovered in 2007, but five more bad links [copies] were found in 2010.
------------

AOC 2436vh LCD Monitor Review

I purchased a new Dell PC a few weeks ago which I don't want to review for a few more days. However I do want to review the AOC monitor I purchase at the same time. The AOC was a seperate purchased that did not come with the Dell.

The AOC monitor is a 24 inch wide screen, longer than wider. It seems like a nice display but the problem I have with it is the display size. Currently I have almost a 1 inch black border around the display which means I really have a 22 inch monitor and not a 24 inch which I purchased. A blank border as in no information is displayed, so is unusable.

I've tried using the soft keys on the display to correct the display problem, but either the monitor will not fill in the display or I can't figure out the correct key sequence.

AOC has a video [animated] help sequence showing the bottom sequence for a similar monitor, but I just couldn't follow it. To get to the soft screen buttons I need, I have to turn other functions off [I think]. But if I can't figure how to change the screen size in 20 minutes, than my opinion is they got it wrong. For what ever reason the AOC site does not have any help files out under the 2436vh selection.

Now I could have wrote a review out at Best Buy, maybe to help some one else thinking about buying this monitor, but I didn't want to create an account. Or I didn't want tons of e-mail from Best Buy for the rest of my life. There was a comment in their reviews section that mentioned the softkeys, but it was only one out of 5 reviews. There are also a few requests for help out on the web with the same border issue, but as usually there are no answers, just more comments.

I would not recommend buying the AOC 2436vh because I can't figure out how to adjust the screen size. If an electrical engineer can't figure out how to adjust the screen size I wouldn't expect a normal PC user to solve the problem either.

I'm using
Operating System: Windows 7 Home Premium.
Video Card: ATI Radeon HD 5770, with 1 GB GDDR5 video memory [HDMI connection]
Screen Resolution: 1920 x 1080 [which is recommended], Landscape

I also have another 18 inch monitor connected to the same video card [at a different resolution], but that shouldn't matter. I plan to replace the 18" also but not with an AOC monitor. I'm glad I only purchased one monitor with the computer. Maybe next week I'll go out and get a replacement monitor, after I do a bit more research. Also see Companies making PC Monitors.

At least I got a blog post out of this. I'll append an up-date when I get the next monitor. I'll look around for a factory reset also.

About three hours after I wrote this post I changed the monitor resolution and the display filled the screen. Now I had tried that before but only the next lower resolution which the monitor indicated was not support, while this last time I took it down one more notch. Two hours after I got the screen resolution right I received an e-mail from AOC asking if I had tried to reduce the screen resolution, which is good because I had only posted a question to their support a few hour before. Regardless, I still don't like how they do their soft screen controls.

So the reason why the 2436vh hdmi does not fill screen is because of the computer resolution setting. I'm using HDMI for this monitor, and all the seach phrases I've seen include the term HDMI [including searches finding this page].

The monitor defaults to the highest resolution the display will handle, which in turn leads to dead-space around the visible display. The highest resolution is 1920 x 1080. However the Resolution I'm using now is 1680 x 1050, but I'm also using a screen with an aspect ratio of 16:9. So I can't tell if it's a monitor issue, an aspect ratio issue or an HDMI issue.

cpu Heat Sink Fan Stopped Spinning

So I'm working on the computer last night and the PC just shuts down. At first I figured I had a power glitch, but the TV was still on. When I turned it back on the BIOS indicated my fan was not turning. How did I not notice that, the PC sounds like a plane taking off.

Any way I power off and back on to get it the fan to start again but that didn't work. So I turn the PC on its side and pulled the cover, flicked the fan a few times and tried the power on/off again. I reconnected the fan cable thinking it may be a loose connection, but no luck.

This is the cpu fan that really connects to a brick of a heat sink sitting on the cpu. It took a few tries before I could disconnect the fan from the heatsink, but I did get it off. Because other than banging on the fan I really couldn't do any thing. It's not like I could some how fix a fan, but I should have used that time to write down the model number.

So the next day, the fan is spinning now but I didn't do any thing. The internal case temperature is 92.8F and the room temperature is 80.1F. My office is always hotter than the rest of the house, to much electronics in the room and far away from the AC [which is set at 76F]. The PC has been on for about 15 minutes now, after doing a quick backup to a USB thumb drive, as the last backup was more than three weeks ago.

The weird thing is that I was just looking on line at new PCs yesterday, maybe it is time. However other than moving from DD2 to DDR3 I could find a good reason to upgrade. Now maybe I should start looking for a FAN and at the same time get another 2G of memory ~ why not if I'm popping the case anyway.

Well I didn't write down the fan type, I just wanted the time to do a back-up. But I did note this is an AMD socket 939 PC. I don't really want the Heat-Sink fan combo, I'll just take the fan. Not because of the extra $40 but because I don't want to mess around with the cpu to heat sink connection point. I haven't built a PC from scratch for 15 years. Why build one when I can just pick all the components on-line and have it delivered.

Domain Name expired

So my web site went off-line today from around 8am to 5pm. At first I figured it was something I had done because I was adding a few more passwords late last night. But it turns out that my Domain Name had expired.

Now the strange thing is that one of the first things I checked when I could not get my Hosting company to answer their phone. Whois indicated it would expire next year; however I did find an e-mail from last year from my hosting company that it would expire this year ~ So I'm not sure what is up.

What I'm not happy about is that it took about 8 hours for my hosting guy to answer my trouble ticket, their phone was never answered over the entire 8 hours either. I never even received a warning e-mail I was about to have an issue either, which turned out to be an old credit card on file with them.

Their home page indicates that because of all the great stuff they offer and their low price, they do not offer support. What? I've been with these guys for years and nothing is new, except for their lack of support. So it's time to start getting ready to get a new hosting company.

Disallow access to server stat files

So after 10 years on the web the spiders have found my server stat files, in this case AWSTATS. This is the program output I use to see data regarding site visitors; number of visits, page views, visit duration, key words and on and on. The program stores the data in large text [txt] files, but outputs the data to me in the form of charts and graphs. In fact the txt files are very large, multi-Mega Byte files, the graphs are some what smaller and more readable.

I would recommend that every web master add a 'Disallow' line to the robots.txt file to stop the web spiders from reading your stat files. In my case the line looks like this; Disallow: /awstats/.

The bottom curve is server bandwidth ~ the increase occurs as my stat files started showing up in my search results. Because the graph is set up to show number of visitors, the bandwidth is normalized. So the 100,000 horizontal bar which indicates 100,000 visits or page views... indicates 10GB of server bandwidth for the bottom curve. The 200,000 line indicates 20GB for bandwidth

I only noticed the server text files showing up in search result about a month ago, because normally I don't need to search my own engineering site ~ right, I wrote it. So I only added a 'block' to the robots file a few weeks ago; however I recommend that you block access now even if you don't have an issue. It only takes a few minutes to add and if you pay for bandwidth or blocked if you exceed bandwidth it may well be worth the time.

If you look back to 2006/2007 you can see that bandwidth tracked unique visits, but by 2008 the gap stated to widen. Two years before Google started to rank pages on down-load speed I had already started to make the web site more efficient.

Unfortunately now the bandwidth data is meaningless, because it only shows these large txt statistic files being downloaded. For example one 2.52MB txt file was downloaded 230 times last month, a 4.11MB file was downloaded 98 times. That's 328 visitors that used the search bar and received bogus results, are they going to come back for a second visit? Really its much worse, before I stopped counting, there were 1,206 people last month who thought that one of those text files was a valid search return.

Download Speed vs Site Performance

I check Google's data on the Engineering Site all the time, again today I rechecked the Site Performance. At least for the last few weeks the time it takes to down-load a page has decreased [always a good thing]. The attached graphic shows the amount of time it takes Google to down-load pages on the site. The numbers don't represent a single page but the average of some number of pages Googlebot tried to read. I don't really think the data is that accurate, because it never takes 4 seconds to download a page, but I read the data because that's what Google is looking at to determine site performance.

There is no way to tell why my site is coming in faster. The server could be working faster, Google pulled fewer pages or Google pulled small pages; who knows? Well I can check and see how many pages Google crawled per day and it's about the same between now and mid June. Google Crawl Stats indicate an average of 673 pages per day over the last few months.

However; I've been working on making the site faster for months, but not really getting anything to work. The basic problem is that any time I update a page and make the HTML text smaller [less code], I add more data making the page larger. So I may make the html code more efficient [decreasing download times], but I add more human readable text increasing the download time.

The current data [below] indicates the average time to download pages on the site takes 2.6 seconds. This is only important because Google rates site by download speed, so it's Search Engine Optimization [SEO].

Related Blog Posts;
Page Download Times [7-15-2010] 3.1 seconds to download
Speed Performance Overview [6-16-2010] 2.8 seconds to download
Web Site Performance [4-22-2010] 3.7 seconds to download
Google now ranks pages by speed [4-14-2010] No speed data.
Website Speed Performance [4-3-2010] 3.7 seconds to load.

IE 8 takes forever to shut down

I'm not really sure why but Internet Explorer takes a long time to close down. When I close down a single tab, the tab closes right away. However when I close down the program it takes forever to shut down, with the first few tabs taking the longest amount of time. I always have three browsers open; IE, Firefox and Chrome.

I tried looking up reasons on the web, but no luck. Just a bunch of real old IE crashing issues or out of date info.

Anyway here is how the top five browsers are doing on the engineering site: Explorer usage continues to decline, while Firefox seems to have stalled. Both browsers seem to be getting hurt by the increase in Chrome usage. Chrome did not exist before 2009.



1/1/2010 to 8/21/2010
Internet Explorer = 49.08%  [800,493 visitors]
Mozilla Firefox = 35.15% [573,338 visitors]
Google Chrome = 8.66% [141,218 visitors]

Link Checker Firefox Extension

I went ahead and hand-checked about 20 pages in the OEM Manufacturers section. Now I did just check the entire web site the other day, but there's a catch. Those automated programs do not always find 'bad-links'.

If a site goes bad or out of business and their web site payment becomes due, then ads could pop-up instead of the old engineering information. Seems right, once the payments run out the domain registrar takes over and runs their own ads, and the site appears "good" to the automated software checker. So you still need to hand check links. Any way I only found one 'bad' link which pointed to an ad, out of 20 pages and 2 hours of checking.

I found Link Checker on the web today and I down loaded the program (but have not used it yet). What I have used is the Firefox Browser extension for Link Checker that checks links on a per page basis. Yes it's another automated program, but now if needed I can check a single page with out checking the entire site. Link Checker seemed to work well. I used it to check each of the 'A' pages in the OEM Company section.

While testing it I noticed that it checked all the internal and external links on a page. However when I went to the next page all my internal links went 'green' right away, telling me that the program was not rechecking them ~ which is good. Link Checker uses color to indicate if a link is good or bad, so some what easy to use. I just tried three other pages but all the links are coming up good. Maybe I'll post a comment in a few days if I do find a bad link with the program, or if I load and run the entire .exe version of the program. The best I can get is a Yellow link which I assume is a 'no robots allowed', not checked link.....

So it's not all about adding new pages, sometimes you have to insure that the pages that are already out there are good, or are otherwise not hurting the web site. I also should have said that the Link Checker program is fast, but only as fast as the site it's checking; right, because it has to wait until it gets a response from the external site.

How often should site links be checked

I normally try to check external links on the site every 3 months or so. I'd like to check more often but I just see it as a severe hit to my server, because the link checker program has to read every page. At the same time it's a lot of work to use this program because at any given time there are always a few dozen websites off-line for what ever reason, so I have to recheck those. Of course how many companies could go out of business or change hands in a three month time period.

Any way this time around there were about 20 bad links including 3 from me, pointing to a misspelled address on my own site. I still have a few more links in my to-do box, waiting a few days to see if they come back on-line. The attached graphic shows the data produced by the link checker program. Over 99.5% of the links were good, but I didn't track all the link conditions. The report indicates I have 7,815 external links and 1,917 internal [page-to-page] links; because there are 1,917 pages that make up the web site.

So if you have external links it's always a good idea to keep them up to date. You never know who buys up the link once its gone bad. Search engines don't like broken links and of course visitors never like bad links, they just make the site seem abandoned. Oh I should also say I tried using the program over the last few week but just kept getting to many broken internal links in the report making the report impossible to use ~ the program was over-loading my server. The program and server worked ok today....

At the same time I fixed those bad links I also made what ever updates were required on the 20 pages that were 'fixed', making the process take twice as long as it needed.

Click to enlarge the graphic.

Computer Generated Pages

So I don't really know how many engineers read this blog, but I really need to comment on all these auto generated pages on the internet. Any time I try to look up a part on the internet all the search results that come back are just PC generated pages with nothing more than 100's of part numbers. Now a few of the pages do have a data sheet but they make you click through three pages to find the pdf version. So it's a bit time consuming to find a data sheet for a part that's less than common.

Up until a few months ago a search on Google would let you select the bogus site so they would not reappear in the search results. So by the next search I wouldn't let many of these sites show up. However instead of the de-select function Google changed that to a 'vote-for' star. When I'm looking for these components I don't see many sites to vote for. I just tested out Yahoo and they did a bit better, but not by much.If these guys would just add some content they wouldn't need 10,000 auto generated pages with every part number known to man....

Anyway I vented ~ I was looking for a Zener diode LVA62 which was on page 1 of Yahoo and 4 or 5 on Google. But every week I'm looking up part numbers....

I should also say this occurs much more often when looking for a part that may no longer be second sourced or in production decline, a part that is no longer in full production. I don't really have the same problem with newer parts, never if I know the current manufacturer ~ I can just go to the OEM's site and get the data sheet from there.

Digital Living Network Alliance Products

I mentioned this DLNA certified BluRay player yesterday, thinking I might need it. I'm sure I would like to have DLNA but that may be years away. Because except for the BluRay player which I haven't even purchased yet no other gear that I have is compatible and I see no need to change any thing out until they break. Wireless stuff would be nice but I don't really think I would ever use any of it. I gave away the spare PC I had connected to the HDTV because I never used it, that was wireless too, but not to the TV. I assume the BluRay player would be called a Digital Media Player [DMP].

I would like a new PC but I've been waiting to figure out what they were going to do with USB 3.0 and for PCI-Express 3.0 to be released So I'm about a year away from getting a new PC, but maybe I don't need one [New PC Posting 4/23/10]. The Digital Living Network Alliance indicates that I would need a DLNA certified Network Attached Storage [NAS] device, which I could get instead of a new PC (I guess). I'm not really sure why I would need a network drive when a DLNA certified PC should work, I assume. I'm not really sure if a NAS is the same as a DMS [Digital Media Server] [HDD Vendors].

So the 2 year old 47" flat screen I just blogged about the other day does not appear to be compatible. The 53" or 57" floor model out in the front room has to be 10 years old and the 37" CRT in the back room is even older so this whole idea of caring about DLNA is out the window. I could be years away from getting a new TV.

So it would appear this blog posting is pointless, unless it helps someone like me to understand that unless their buying a whole new system DLNA is just not required.

DVD Player No Disk

I just tried out my KLH 221 DVD player after years of having the thing sitting in my closet. The company is either called KLK Audio or KLH Audio Systems, but I'm not sure of the correct name. Any way I haven't used the thing for about 5 years, and I have no idea when I purchased the player. I had the DVD player setup in a back room that I never used, so it never got a lot of play time, but it was working several years ago.

I tried 3 or 4 DVDs in it yesterday but each time the LCD screen would just display 'No disk', which I assume means it could not read the DVD. However now that I'm thinking about it I don't recall the thing even spinning up. I tried rebooting a few times by pulling the plug but nothing seemed to work. Maybe I'll try it out one more time. Now I did try a quick web search for the model KLH 221, but I couldn't find much or a manual. Most of the web posting were just 'trash' sites with the same re-posts over and over. It could be that this DVD player is almost ten years old, I think it was the first one I ever purchased. Could it be because the CMOS battery went bad and the player no longer remembers how to work, maybe I need some reset code? Oh the remote was still working, that was a surprise.

I do have another DVD player in the front room that I've wanted to replace with a BluRay player. So I guess it's time for a new BluRay for the front room and moving that DVD player into the back room, replacing the one that no longer works. I would have rather purchased a new BluRay in my own time and not because some other system failed. I already have a BluRay in my office, and I may just re-purchase another new Sony BluRay player. I like Sony gear for the front room because that would match the other Sony gear and should work with the Sony remote I use out there.

I see a few reviews that the newer BluRays are loading the disk faster, it's about time. I also see some that have DLNA capability, I guess I want that. I'll have to look around for a few more days.


Just in case the chart in the previous post is a bit busy or hard to read I show the same data a different way. It should be a little easier to see that the site is still doing better than any previous year, but down these last few months because that's the mid-year trend. Of course the visits are way down, but I've always found that the higher the hits the bigger the drops. Maybe one more month before hits start to increase again. Click the image for a larger view of the data.

Server Bandwidth increasing

Even as visitors to the web site have been decreasing over the last few months bandwidth has increased. Now it's normal for site hits to decrease during this time of the year, normal for my site.

In March there were 190,622 unique visitors to the site using 14.64G Bytes of bandwidth.
In June there were 156,355 unique visitors to the site using 16.15G Bytes of bandwidth.
In July there were 150,100 unique visitors to the site using 17.03G Bytes of bandwidth.

Checking Googlebot Crawl Stats the amount of data downloaded did double for the end of July, but only to a high of 28kBytes per day. However the number of pages crawled stayed about average at 812 pages per day. So the only assumption that can be made is that Google was reading pages with more pictures than normal. Some pages have more graphics than normal; also, some of the graphic files are local to the server and some are held out on Picasa. Of course the ones located on Google Picasa do not effect my bandwidth.

Now I have removed a few dozen pic files from Picasa over the last few months. Google started to rank web sites based on down-load speed and they considered getting the pic files from 'Google' Picasa as slow. Not because Picasa is slow, although it maybe, but because they consider looking up the DNS [address] of another web site as being inherently slow. The most relevant posting was Web Site Speed Enhancements.

Last month I did up-load a new site-map to the server which Google has been reading every few days. The site map is 300k Bytes which is the size of about 60 html files, or maybe 30 files if you were to count the pic files too. The reason for up-loading the sitemap was to try and get more pages included in Google's index, which I have but maybe at the cost of server bandwidth. June 30 had 1,504 pages in Google's search index [URL's in Web Index], and as of July 28 there were 1,782 files included in Google's Index.

The server counter AWSTATS indicates that Googlebot used 285.97MB of server bandwidth, and the spider from Yahoo used 227.35MB of bandwidth. I have a [BaiDuSpider] spider from China that used 681.53MBytes of bandwidth. I noticed that a number of internet posts have had issues with the amount of data being indexed by this particular spider. It would appear that over the previous few months BaiDuSpider was only reading about 15MB/months so maybe it just got around to reading the entire web-site.

Now checking Google Analytics I see no real increase in visits from China, a little over 3,000 a month for the last three months. The top 10 robots used almost 3G Bytes of bandwidth, it's to bad their not sending me more traffic.

Even Alexa used over 329MBytes to spider my site, to bad my traffic rank is down 26,000 [-10% Reach] but then that would figure because my hits are down as well.
Oh and I just noticed that Google is also reading my text files from my stats counter, so that's another 20M of data it got off my server.

I guess I should also mention that over the last thirty days I've added maybe 30 pages and maybe that many pic files so that would account for a bit of the increase too. Anyway check out the attached chart, the lowest trend is bandwidth [normalized] ~ click to enlarge.

Westinghouse TX-47F430S 47"Flat Screen Review

I purchased this 47 inch flat screen a few years ago, and for the most part I like how it works. I did add a post for the TV but never wrote a review for it. Early this year I hocked up a BluRay player and I had a few issues with the TV auto detecting the signal. I ended up turning the TV off and back on until it found the signal, actually I had to unplug the set because just turning it off didn't help. Any way the TV always detects the BluRay now and I just figured it was me not reading the directions, However I did move the BluRay over to the HDMI 1 channel connector. I just found some reviews on the web and other people were having the same issue of not detecting the incoming signals [auto-source switching]. Seems to work fine now.

I like the set, the 1080p picture is great but I really just use the set in my office while I'm working on the web site.
So over the last few months the sound has gone out, or slowed down ~ like putting your finger on an LP to slow the sound down. Again I have to unplug the set to get it to reset. I canceled cable a few months ago so I use a Terk antenna to watch TV, or just use a DVD. I only just started over-the-air TV a few months ago and that's when the issue started. I have to assume that when the TV starts to lose the signal it gets a bit confused.

I purchased this HDTV in 2008 but it looks like they still sell it so the review is still valid. Maybe they have fixed these issues by now, but the TV has only done this stuff a few times.

Blogger has some new features

Blogger is finally coming out with some new settings, and it's about time.
I've been on Blogger for about 5 years now and it seems that Google never adds any thing new, at least until this year. It does add new templates from time to time, but I've never been interested in changing. Now at the beginning of the year Google allowed Amazon to display ads on Blogger, so that's different.

Now Google has added Stats, so you can tell who visits the blog or what page the visitor views. Up until now I had used the stats from the ads that I run to tell how often that the blog was being visited. I also used Google Analytics to see who then visited www.interfacebus.com and what page they came from. They're both round-about ways to tell how the blog is doing, but I never got around to adding a free counter to the blogger template.

Blogger only just started counting pages last month, so I only have one month of data. The page with the most visits was written in 2008, followed by one from 2010, 2006, and 2005.

I just tried to up-load an image and I see they changed that function too. Instead of 'up-load a file' I get add from Blogger, Picasa, or from an html address ~ so I'm lost and will not be adding a picture from the stats counter??

URLs in Web Index

I'm going to partially re-post a blog I wrote just a few weeks ago regarding web-pages included in Google's Index. I've only added a dozen pages in the last two months so the increase in the number of pages indexed has to be due the SEO changes being made to pre-existing pages already on the web. The Index History relates to an Engineering Portal on the web.

Index History:
6/30/10 = 1,504 indexed pages.
6/24/10 = 1,455 indexed pages
6/18/10 = 1,426 indexed pages
6/9/10   = 1,411 indexed pages.
5/31/10 = 1,400 indexed pages.
5/22/10 = 1,394 indexed pages.
4/7/10   = 1,309 indexed pages.
3/27/10 = 1,322 indexed pages. [Site-map loaded]
12/19/09 = 1,481 indexed pages. [Site-map loaded]
12/13/08 = 1,318 indexed pages. [Site-map loaded]


 That's not to bad, 12 new pages added, but 100 more pages indexed by Google.

Does the increase in indexed pages imply that all of a sudden the site will start receiving a great many more site visitors, not really. But it does mean that the newly indexed pages will show up in a Google search for that topic, maybe not first in the list but at least they will show up now.

 No Page Rank; Company index 'M'.

I think I'll run a new site map later tonight, once the traffic slows down. I'll get those dozen or so new pages included, and remove a few FAQ pages that have been de-linked over the last few weeks. I did have a few pages that are not being used but still had links pointing to them, but Google dropped them from the index long ago ~ time to removed the link and orphan the pages.
I'll add a comment to this post once Google has time to read the new sitemap.

Graphic; Number of visits to the web site 1/1/10 to 6/29/10 [mid-year update].
Year-to-date = 17.48% increase in visits over the same time period last year [192,858 more visits].

Web Page Hits per Hour

Here's one more graphic from the FAQ section of the web site. This one shows Page Visits by hour of the day.

 

Visits by Hour, May 2010

.

Comparing Site Vists

I figured I would take another look at how the site is doing compared to last year. As of last week the site is still getting 10% more site visits than the same week last year.

Over all the web site is still getting more than 17% more web visits year-to-date, down 1% from 3 weeks ago. The first week of June had the lowest increase with only 6% more visits to the site. The largest increase in visits occurred on the last week in Jan with a 26% increase.

Over all the site is showing a 15% increase over 2008 visits, and about a 14% increase over 2007.

The graph compares web visits for 2010 and 2009 ~ by week.

Page-views [not shown] are down 4%, year to date over last year.

FAQ-Incoming-Linked-Sites

I'm up-loading a graphic from the site to reduce both the size of the graphic that gets loaded and a separate DNS look-up that is required to load the graphic. The graphic is of Linked-sites, or sites linking to interfacebus.com from external sites. The graphic was stored out on Google Picasa, and not on the server, which required the extra DNS look-up.

So the page that held the graphic was deleted and a link pointing to this blog posting added to the pages that pointed to the old page. The point was to reduce that page from maybe 12k of html text to zero, delete the external look-up for the 100k graphic and reduce the over-all load time for the site.

Last month I did the same thing to 2 or 3 other FAQ pages to reduce the over-all loading time of the site. Remember Google rank page loading time as well as just key words.

Pages Crawled Per Day

Crawl Stats;

Looks like Google is finally slowing down checking my Engineering Site. After 2 months of heavy Googlebot activity the spider seems to be taking a break, which is good. There's really no reason Google should be reading 2,000 pages a-day. The numbers shown in the graph are High number of pages, Average number and low number of pages spidered each day.

HTML Suggestions;

I finally got down to the point that Google does not have an suggestions of fixing any meta-tags. It seems like there were a few duplicate pages that were unused that I never fixed ~ so they may have been de-listed.Here is what Google has to say;
"We didn't detect any content issues with your site. As we crawl your site, we check it to detect any potential issues with content on your pages, including duplicate, missing, or problematic title tags or meta descriptions. These issues won't prevent your site from appearing in Google search results, but paying attention to them can provide Google with more information and even help drive traffic to your site. For example, title and meta description text can appear in search results, and useful, descriptive text is more likely to be clicked on by users."

Sitemaps;

1,653 URLs submitted, 1,426 URLs Indexed.