Closed Thread
www.internetadauctions.com
Old 01-18-2005, 08:15 PM www.internetadauctions.com
Novice Talker

Posts: 8
Location: ga.
please review my new site also any coments on whether this would be a helpful tool would be appreciated.
duramaxlt is offline
View Public Profile Visit duramaxlt's homepage!
 
When You Register, These Ads Go Away!
Old 01-21-2005, 02:53 AM
Line's Avatar
Extreme Talker

Posts: 200
Hi Duramaxlt,

1) Your whole front page is done all with images. You should have actual text there so people don't have to download all the graphics. If you did the whole page with text, your site's text content would also be found in search engines.

2) I really have no idea what this site is about. You should have at least one paragraph telling us why we're at your site. The small one line of text: "Webmaster Auctions: Traffic, Domains, Sites.." Etc. is not descriptive enough to make me want to click anything else.

3) The site's overall design really needs some work. I feel overwhelmed with the images and text content.

-Line
__________________
http://www.LineDetail.com | The LineDetail Drawing Co. | Theme Site Design • Art • Animation
http://www.WebSlime.com | Low Cost Web Hosting & Domain Name Registration.
Line is offline
View Public Profile Visit Line's homepage!
 
Old 01-21-2005, 06:18 AM
pixelputty's Avatar
Webmaster Talker

Posts: 648
This has an oldie look about it, don`t get me wrong it`s nice as sites go, IMHO it needs an introduction, I like the 3 step approach but the content of these tables needs to look the same, the text is different in looks, in each box, finally the box in the centre below the 3 steps looks out of place, it`s the blue, well done and good luck.
__________________
Click here to visit the UFO Portal
The truth is out there!
pixelputty is offline
View Public Profile
 
Old 01-21-2005, 06:37 AM
dojo's Avatar
Ultra Talker

Latest Blog Post:
Keep an eye on that budget!
Posts: 296
Location: Romania
Loads in an year
Lose the heavy graphics and instead cut them and make backrounds ... Use actual text, it's more crawlable that way
It's not ugly, but you should use text and images to make it beautiful not images all the time. I like the site anyway ... take this into account and tell us when you've done it so that we can come and see the changes
__________________
Wtricks.com - webmaster tutorials, articles, community, links, blog and free downloads
Romanian webmaster forums
dojo is offline
View Public Profile Visit dojo's homepage!
 
Old 01-22-2005, 08:13 PM
Kaiman's Avatar
Extreme Talker

Posts: 237
I agree wholeheartedly with the post above. The load time on this site is outrageous.

Kaiman

Storm King Design
Kaiman is offline
View Public Profile
 
Old 01-22-2005, 10:58 PM
Experienced Talker

Posts: 32
Most of the mishaps have already been pointed out; the front page is all images. Which if you are on high-speed is fine but a lot of people are still on dialup and may night have time/be willing to wait for the entire page to load, now you could make the images smaller in size but that would just mean making the text more blurry and that wouldn’t look very attractive.

I didn’t really get what the site had to offer either.

As I was reading, I noticed that as I said before, the text on the images was blurry (to me) so I couldn’t read all of it without getting mixed up of where I was.
__________________
KY Designs.net
Affordable website, brochure and logo design for small and upcoming businesses.
kydesignsnet is offline
View Public Profile Visit kydesignsnet's homepage!
 
Closed Thread     « Reply to www.internetadauctions.com
 

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Webmaster Resources Marketplace:
Software Development Company | Webhosting.UK.com | Text Link Brokers 


   
RSS Feed  Feeds: RSS   JS   XML
RSS Feed  Feeds for this forum: RSS   JS   XML

 


Page generated in 0.14570 seconds with 12 queries