[theme-reviewers] Need Clarification on theme name which is fine as per the guideline and as per the other theme names !

Tue Jul 22 21:51:10 UTC 2014

Why should reviewers be conducting Google searches? And what are they
supposed to do with the results? And most importantly: what do those
efforts provide in end-user benefits?

On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 4:47 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Made up words have least potential to be an SEO keywords, but if you don't
> want to ban dictionaries, a simple google search with WordPress theme as an
> append to that theme name would reveal its intent.
>
> ex:
> There will be almost nill relevant results for "Oenology Wordpress Theme"
> before it was created by you.
> There will be nill relevant results for "sharpet wordpress theme"
> There will be nill relevant results for "reptio wordpress theme"
>
> There will be a ton of relevant results for "wine wordpress theme"
> There will be a ton of relevant results for "premium photography wordpress
> theme"
> There will be a ton of relevant results for "mobile first wordpress theme"
>
> And a simple search is so very easy to perform and easy to judge. that
> would be about 0.1% of workload for a reviewer. This is all assuming we
> don't want the directory to be :
>
> http://www.wordpress.org/themes/premium-photography
> http://www.wordpress.org/themes/premium-responsive-photography
> http://www.wordpress.org/themes/responsive-photography
> http://www.wordpress.org/themes/responsive-small-business
> http://www.wordpress.org/themes/premium-mobile-first
> http://www.wordpress.org/themes/one-page-mobile-first
> etc
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 2:41 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
> wrote:
>
>> We're talking in circles. I'm merely explaining the current Guideline.
>> You're asking for a *new* Guideline.
>>
>> "Names like divi, avada, kyan, bron are fair/enforceable because those
>> made up names are not SEO keywords"
>>
>> Please try to think through that assertion to its logical conclusions,
>> including all intended and unintended consequences. "SEO Keyword" is not
>> some fixed definition. It depends on context. Again, I'll use my own Theme
>> as the example: under your suggestion, "Oenology" would not be a
>> permissible Theme name, because it is a real word (i.e. not a made-up word)
>> that could be used for SEO purposes.
>>
>> So do we throw out the entire English dictionary? And why just the
>> English dictionary? What about Spanish? Or Latin? or Chinese? And if we
>> don't blanket-ban dictionary words: who gets to decide the context and
>> intent of a term used in/as a Theme name, to determine if that use is for
>> "SEO" purposes or not?
>>
>> Is that really where you think we should be going?
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't agree with :
>>>
>>>
>>> Theme A name: "SEO Keyword" = good
>>> Theme B name "SEO Keyword by a Bunch of Other SEO Keywords ThemeShop" =
>>> bad
>>>
>>> I think
>>>
>>> Theme A name: "SEO Keyword" = bad
>>> Theme B name "SEO Keyword by a Bunch of Other SEO Keywords ThemeShop" =
>>> bad bad bad bad
>>>
>>> Names like divi, avada, kyan, bron are fair/enforceable because those
>>> made up names are not SEO keywords.
>>>
>>> All I can do is explain my point and if that is okay with admins, then
>>> so be it.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 2:15 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Your changed example may be the "ground reality", but it is NOT to
>>>> focus of the quoted Guideline. That's the point I'm trying to make. To be
>>>> perfectly clear, under the current Guideline:
>>>>
>>>> Theme A name: "SEO Keyword" = good
>>>> Theme B name "SEO Keyword by a Bunch of Other SEO Keywords ThemeShop" =
>>>> bad
>>>>
>>>> "If you want a enforceable, objective, definable and fair naming
>>>> standards, you should simply ask us to use made up names like divi, avada,
>>>> kyan, bron"
>>>>
>>>> This makes no sense, and is the exact opposite of enforceable,
>>>> objective, definable, and fair.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> My changed example is the ground reality, If its not within the
>>>>> purview of TRT(not sure why it isn't) I was willing to make my case before
>>>>> WP foundation but Otto seems to speak for them so its not needed anymore.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you want a enforceable, objective, definable and fair naming
>>>>> standards, you should simply ask us to use made up names like divi, avada,
>>>>> kyan, bron
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> You asked for clarification on the current Guideline. The example I
>>>>>> gave explains the intent of that Guideline.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your changed example is something completely different, and not
>>>>>> something I believe to be within the purview of the TRT.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Take the name of my own Theme, for example: Oenology.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now, my Theme has nothing to do with Wine, though I take artistic
>>>>>> license with it in the Theme description and motivation. Are you suggesting
>>>>>> that my Theme name is acceptable as-is, but if I'd made a wine-related
>>>>>> Theme, then it would *not* be acceptable, merely because it is a relevant
>>>>>> SEO keyword?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry, I just can't get behind that. It's not objective, definable,
>>>>>> enforceable, or fair.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Chip,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> convert this :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Theme A name: "Some Name"
>>>>>>>  Theme B name: "Some Name by Amazing SEO Keywords"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Theme A name: "SEO Keywords"
>>>>>>> Theme B name: "Some Name by Amazing SEO Keywords"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In the former, why are you objecting to Theme B name? because it has
>>>>>>> "SEO Keywords"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 12:39 AM, Emil Uzelac <emil at uzelac.me>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nice look + Great support + Great rating = Success in directory
>>>>>>>> and or any other place out there.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Catchy name is worthless without this.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Srikanth Koneru <tskk79 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> That is why I said theme should be at least half decent, success
>>>>>>>>> depends on how many people are actually using it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 12:32 AM, Otto <otto at ottodestruct.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Srikanth Koneru <
>>>>>>>>>> tskk79 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Otto, which search are you talking about Google or theme
>>>>>>>>>>> directory?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This is how it works :
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I make a theme, name it "Premium Photography" get it into
>>>>>>>>>>> directory, I get a url
>>>>>>>>>>> www.wordpress.org/themes/premium-photography and my credit link
>>>>>>>>>>> will be <a href="
>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.wordpress.org/themes/premium-photography">Premium
>>>>>>>>>>> Photography Theme</a>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I get downloads from directory which will get me link juice,
>>>>>>>>>>> combining the link juice and wordpress.org domain authority I
>>>>>>>>>>> am already in the top 3-7 ranks on google, give it some time to get more
>>>>>>>>>>> downloads and build links and I am in top 1-3 and I now have a steady
>>>>>>>>>>> monthly pay check with no effort.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> All you need is a half decent theme and a nice keyword, now if I
>>>>>>>>>>> get lucky and it gets featured, I can buy a nice car or a house.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Well, if you think so, then go for it. Best of luck. However,
>>>>>>>>>> being that I have the actual download and usage stats, let's just say that
>>>>>>>>>> I have my doubts. :)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Names don't matter that much. Your Google-fu is not as strong as
>>>>>>>>>> you believe it to be. WordPress.org is indeed a major player, but we're not
>>>>>>>>>> the only game in town, and the truth is that people look for themes based
>>>>>>>>>> on screenshots and functionality. Names may get you a Google search result,
>>>>>>>>>> but they don't get a download or usage, and the fact of the matter is that
>>>>>>>>>> people aren't stupid.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -Otto
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>>>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>>>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20140722/959cad82/attachment-0001.html>