I'll do the best I can, which is take you directly to the source:

https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/76329?hl=en

"Consider organizing your content so that URLs are constructed logically and in a manner that is most intelligible to humans (when possible, readable words rather than long ID numbers)."

That's fairly clear and exactly what you're trying to get at. This article is a direct piece of the "Webmaster Guidelines" section - and should be followed where possible. This should be enough to get you across the line.

I also think most SEOs would agree that Google uses keywords in the URL to at least some extent. We know they use search with synonyms and related keywords. So if your URL contains /seo/ it's much more related to "seo" searches than /123/ is. So yes, it will help. It's hard (impossible) to quantify by how much though.

I've seen many pages optimize both the homepage and an inner page. Think about how most SEO agency pages are organized. Homepage has some SEO content - and most pages that rank for "SEO" are homepages. But then you have the same sites also inevitably have an /seo/ page on them or /services/seo as well.

So doing both is sort of standard operating procedure for some businesses but it really depends.

• Best for ranking would be as Eric said. Optimize as if you're writing a book. Homepage should be optimized for the title / main topic.
• Best for conversions may be to have a dedicated landing page for each topic and use your homepage to tie them together.

There really isn't a higher authority than "Google said so in WMT guidelines" when it comes to SEO for your site.

I know they're looking for case study or whatnot but all I can suggest is explain that Guidelines ARE the rules, Guidelines specifically and directly cover this question. So you should follow the Guidelines.

https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/35769?hl=en says "Following these guidelines will help Google find, index, and rank your site."

I looked for case studies on this but search is done in words not numbers so I assume it's because it's fairly obvious that it can only help. Good luck!

Google will do this somewhat in the search but I wouldn't do it on your site. You won't be telling Google what the page is about, you'll be asking Google what the page should be about. That's a very weak position to come at things from.

With the very little amount that Google actually passes you the search query, it's probably not very useful to attempt to implement this on pages.

On your Adwords, for sure. But not on your actual website, imho.

Most SEOs I know don't know this but yes, some sites are legally required to have alt text. However, they are government sites, those who accept federal dollars or anyone who's tied to the Electronic and Information Technology Accessibility Standards under section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, (“508 Standards”).

You can read more about these accessibility requirements here: http://www.access-board.gov/guidelines-and-standards/communications-and-it/about-the-ict-refresh/proposed-rule/ii-executive-summary

While alt text is not required for a standard commercial or informational business (as far as I know), it does help with long tail traffic, though not always the kind that converts. I would want alt text on a clothing store's images but not necessarily on a page about eye surgery. (People are unlikely to hire a doctor based on a nice photo.)

Hi Brett,

I moved to Australia a year ago and dealt with the same thing.  Most citation sources are US/UK.  I have compiled a list of AU and CA ones for my own use.  To help you along, I just posted the CA list here:

http://www.highonseo.com/2012/12/canada-citation-list/

Hope that helps.  It's a compilation of a LOT of lists from around the web.  If you download the XLS at the end, it has the pagerank, mozrank, domain authority, etc. for every site on the list, update as of this morning.

You're not considering a lot of factors that go into SEO:

1. Page speed could be better on #1.

2. Over optimization on page 2 - with many links with anchor text that includes "editing"

3. "editing" appears 80 times on page 1, 66 times on page 2, despite page 2 having more text.  I'm not saying this is a case of keyword density/spamming it, but maybe they're on the line and #2 is under it.

4. Better overall inbound link authority to #2 possibly.

5. Page 2 has repetition of both keywords in the title.  Google already punishes this if you don't have noODP by replacing your title with a more suitable one.  They aren't big fans of duplication but even so, #2 has a much different title.

6. Co-citation.  Even with a better DA and PA, the related inbound links may be more relevant to essay editing on page 1.  Also, more domains may point directly at the subpage essay-editing.html than they do the absolute page at /essay-editing/index.php

7. Analytics matter.  If #2 bounce rate is double #1, and the time on site for #1 is 4 minutes longer per visitor and they get more traffic through an email list that actually stays on site, they'd have a natural boost in the "analytics" department, as well.

There are always a million reasons why one site could or may outrank another.  All you can realistically do is improve your site as much as possible, create relevant links back, get citations that all match, engage on social and have a site that responds well when people click it.

The problem with asking SEOs about DMOZ is it used to be VERY valuable. Now it's not.

But it does still retain some value.  Consider a $500 per share stock that falls to $50 per share. It's going to feel practically worthless but it still has more value than MSFT stock ($43 a share today.)

So the relative value is "massive decline, don't recommend" but the true value is probably "it has some value, is easy to create, but may never go live. It's 20% a $50 share and 80% a $0 never-goes-live share.

Whether that's worth your time is up to you.