- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Yes, it makes sense, i believe it’s a very good explanation.
Thanks, Professor!So far I have been lucky and didn’t lost my pr and even did gained some backlinks
, but i noticed pr drop on several sites among my link partners. 
Hope this is temporary.Hi Prof,
I have a few examples where I saw people buy links on sits with PR9 and about 1000 of their sub pages (which are pR 7-
, all of these backlinks are listed, sio it may depend on the PR.BUT if you are right it means that if you excahnged links with people using links manager service who do not host their own link pages (but keep them on linksmanager server) you will not get credit for them, with my experience in the link exchange, anout 85% of the people who use the linksmanager service DO NOT HOST their link pages , so ….
/Janet
BTW, hope to see you all in the bahamas this april ….
Hmmm…well I’m just starting out…and all I had was one back link listed (I’m assuming Google only lists backlinks that are pr5…right?)
Anyhow…just checked..and now its gone. However…I seem to have gone from a PR1 to a PR3.
This is a myth. Mutiple links from a single domain continue to be as valuable as ever.
Oh do they?
I suppose the back links that disapeared off my sites were a myth?
I have sites with hundreds of pages and I monitor back links daily via the google tool bar and I personally saw this happen at my sites with my own two eyes. Am I merely confused? Am I lying?
While its only a theory as to WHY these back links disapeared I can assure you they did. Its even possible they will come back and that Google is not fully done with an update, but I am not making this up. If you check with larger webmasters I bet this has happened to others as well. (back links dropped and PR dropped suddenly on Monday) I know because I talk to other webmasters and they told me they saw the same thing.
I do not set out to spread MYTHS idley Classics and I dont appreciate your statement.
:angry:I experienced the same problem with backlinks unfortunately. I think I’m going to throw a party the day Yahoo drops google, this is getting ridiculous.
These sites have a link campaign. Obviously multiple links are counting.
In your case Professor, you may be confusing a cause with an effect. Your PR goes down, and suddenly a lot of PR4 links now become PR3 and no longer show as backlinks. Just because they don’t show doesn’t mean that they aren’t helping you though.
The lower number of backlinks did not lead to the lower PR. Lower PR leads to less backlinks showing.
I don’t know exactly what has changed for you Professor, but you still do show multiple backlinks from some domains. Are you talking about missing links from pages where you host both the linked to and linked from site? They might be ignoring/downgrading links that are closely IP related, but as the above group shows, multiple links are still counting and offering a big benefit.
Personally I dont think a site should get a boost for having 200 links from 1 other domain – after a certain number they should stop counting. Say more than half a dozen links from 1 site to another would indicate some sort of linking scheme with the intent of boosting PR and rankings.
If google is going after this type of activity Id have no problem with it. I witnessed a site several months back pull this off with great success. The famous .md sites had a linking scheme between several of their sites – they linked to every other site on every single page. It appeared as if they had thousands of links, until you seen they were all coming from each other.
In my book thats crap and of no use to the average surfer who is actually looking for information.
Also Ive seen sites out their that are exchanging 20,30, or more links on their homepage – why do they do this? In hopes of getting a higher PR boost. This is a linking scheme and should be frowned upon.
This is something I believe google can easily pick up on. Im sure they must have a trigger mechanism E.G. a number that is acceptable. Furthermore Im sure they will begin enforcing this some time soon.
Here’s a pretty informative article, written by Jason Dowdell at GlobalPromoter.com
“Here’s the skinny on the latest Google Dance (from: 11/18/2003)
* Called “Update Florida” because similar to the last Presidential election, it was full of controversy and tons of upset people.
* Many people that had worked hard to build up solid and reputable backlinks appear to have been punished for no obvious reason. Even though their inbound links contain their main keyword phrase and have content related to their site in the title of the inbound linked page.
* Rankings have dropped for main targeted keywords but have not dropped for more specific keyword phrases. Rankings are not just for search engine optimization firms but are for web sites of every kind and variety.
* Results appear to have been repopulated from data that looks to be about 6 months old.Original Google Update Florida Predictions and Explanations
* Probable: Google is either testing an updated algorithm or they are not factoring in the backlinks created in the past 6 months.
* Not Probable: SEO techniques that could be considered SPAM to Google are being filtered out in an effort to provide more relevant results. I’m doubtful on this one since the results are from about 6 months ago and many of them are not very relevant.
* Probable: Google is doing yet another deep crawl, we haven’t seen on in about 6 months, and they want to build a fresher, more relevant search base from sites currently out there that the Fresh Crawl GoogleBots may not be picking up.
* Not Probable: Many sites that have dropped off will never come back to the top because they have been penalized. As far as we know Google doesn’t penalize sites, they simply list them or delist them. Just like God, there is no gray area with Google, it’s either black or white. If you’re considered a black hat then your site will not show up anywhere in Google’s index, not even for the most descriptive keyword searches.And the Verdict is In!
Let’s start from the beginning with the first prediction and move down from there.
Prediction no.1: Google is either testing an updated algorithm or they are not factoring in the backlinks created in the past 6 months.
Verdict: I was right and wrong on this one.I was wrong about Google not factoring in backlinks created in the past 6 months. I was right about them testing new filters. Google has not dumped their old algorithm by any means. Instead they have created new filters to penalize sites who’s pagerank was artificially inflated due to less than reputable linking practices. What are less than reputable linking practices you ask? These include…
* Exact same phrase or a high percentage of the exact same phrase (text links) and alt text (image links) in backlinks. This catches folks caught up in link farms because they don’t rotate the text used to link to their sites.
Solution: Create a link to us page that has at least 5 different links using different keyword phrases. This way you spread out the concentration of text across the general theme of your site.
* Links from sites that are of a different subject matter than the site being linked to. When there is no mention of your subject matter in the body, title, keywords and description of the page linking to your site.
* Links from sites that don’t show up in search results for the keywords used in the links. This is because it is widely accepted that Google as implemented a localrank technology that determines whether or not your backlinks are from sites that rank for similar keywords used in the backlink. If so, then you’re fine, if not then you’re going to have problems getting to the top even if you have a high pagerank.Prediction no.2: Not Probable: SEO techniques that could be considered SPAM to Google are being filtered out in an effort to provide more relevant results. I’m doubtful on this one since the results are from about 6 months ago and many of them are not very relevant.
Verdict: I was right on this one
Google is not penalizing sites for being overly optimized or for having keywords in the title, description and keywords of the page or having them in the Heading tags or anywhere else. The penalization is only coming into effect when backlinks are overly optimized and not from other industry resource sites. The results appears to be old only because the sites that ranked well earlier weren’t part of the linking scams and they returned to the top for that very reason.
Prediction no.3: Probable: Google is doing yet another deep crawl, we haven’t seen on in about 6 months, and they want to build a fresher, more relevant search base from sites currently out there that the Fresh Crawl GoogleBots may not be picking up.
Verdict: I was right again.
Yes, Google did another deep crawl and refreshed the backlinks of sites and update their PageRank about 2 weeks later. But this deep crawl is done on almost a continual basis now and doesn’t affect the rankings like many thought it did. Rankings were affected due to the implementation of new filters and that’s the only reason why.
Prediction no.4: Not Probable: Many sites that have dropped off will never come back to the top because they have been penalized. As far as we know Google doesn’t penalize sites, they simply list them or delist them. Just like God, there is no gray area with Google, it’s either black or white. If you’re considered a black hat then your site will not show up anywhere in Google’s index, not even for the most descriptive keyword searches.
Verdict: I was wrong.
Well I guess nobody’s perfect. Google is not necessarily “penalizing” sites but they are “filtering” sites out based on whether or not certain filters are triggered by the site for a particular keyword search. While a site may show up for a very detailed search or an off topic search, it may not rank well for a highly competitive (typically commercial) term if they have tripped a filter for that term.
In order to understand my predictions and conclusions correctly I need to explain a few more things that have bubbled up from the Google Update Florida and how they affect search results that are delivered today on Google.
Not only did Google implement filters but they also implemented new features which make it seem like the old algorithm was thrown out and they started over from scratch. While many will tell you Google isn’t as relevant as it once was I will contest that they’re changing to remain the most relevant search engine out there. Here’s a rundown on the new features.
* Google Implemented Stemming Technologies: Stemming means taking a root word and determining all variations of engine for that word. Now a search for “game sites” may return sites optimized for “gaming sites” “gamer sites” “gamed sites”. This increases the number of results delivered for highly targeted keywords and increases the dependency on solid natural optimization.
You can disable stemming by adding the “+” sign in front of each word you want to disable stemming for.
* Google Implemented Plural Searches: This means that a search for “knitting needle” and “knitting needles” will return the same results. Thus increasing the competition again since more results are returned for all keyword searches.
* Implementation of LocalRank: Localrank is a technology that looks at the first (x) number of search results. It can be any number the search engine specifies but is typically around 100. After it looks at those results it determines whether or not any of those sites have linked to you and then ranks sites based on how many “popular” sites for a specific search term have linked to you. This is why it’s critical to have someone help you with your link popularity campaign that understands the intricacies of linking and can provide advice that will not hurt you in the long run. Short term link popularity plans from unrelated sites will do nothing to help out your cause. For more information on LocalRank read this forum at WebmasterWorld
* Internal Links Discounted: Links from within your site to particular pages in your site do not count as much as they once did. While this doesn’t mean you need to change your site link structure it is worth noting.
* Artificial PageRank Deflated: Sites that have more than one link from a particular site are experiencing the law of diminishing returns. No longer are 100 links from a single site weighted as 100 individual links. This just makes sense. I mean, if site A has 100 links from a single site and site B has 20 links from 20 individual sites, I can guarantee you that the 20 links to site B will count more than the 100 links to site A.Well I’ll conclude my ramblings with a recap. Google has made many changes and has implemented several filters as well as new algorithm features to ensure it has the most reliable search results set on the internet. In order to climb your way back to the top you need to understand LocalRank, PageRank changes, Proper Link Reputation and Link Popularity, and be aware of anti-spam measures that need to be taken. It all boils down to common sense. Make your site user friendly and easy to navigate, encourage others to link to you by giving them some form of incentive, don’t use the exact same phrase in your backlinks, use good titles that explain what each page is about and keep it simple. By following these rules you can weather any search engine algorithm change and remain at the top with a lot less stress.”
I hope y’all find it helpful. I’d love to hear any comments about it from some of this forum’s ‘google veterans’!
Quote:* Google Implemented Plural Searches: This means that a search for “knitting needle” and “knitting needles” will return the same results. Thus increasing the competition again since more results are returned for all keyword searches.I can’t agree with this. Using the example of “online casino” and “online casinos”, I can guarantee you that the rankings are not equal nor are they returning the same results.
I agree with: google, arkt, professor, [edited to add spear to the list, lol] and everyone else all at the same time.
If you don’t listen to everyone all at once you will fail. It’s all true, even the lies!
It’s kind of like rush hour…. you can get all pissed off and keep trying to change lanes and hope that one will move faster than another, you might get lucky but you can’t change the future…
You need SEO’ed sites. Do the same as you always have or if you want less work, at least don’t change them….
Take two cars at the same time, one in the left lane and one in the right lane…. make sure there is nice “one-way” door for your traffic to get back and forth ! important !
Make it easy for your content site users to get to your SEO sites and vice versa.
Drive in as many lanes as possible.
Sorry Fergie, the author of that has no idea what he is talking about. He seems to have no idea at all about Localrank, which is a technology Google owns but definitely is not applying at this time. Honestly, anyone who thinks localrank is being applied can’t even have looked at actual search results. There are many cases where sites that are authoratative in general, like a newspaper, are ranking well simply because they have an article mentioning the term. This is totally opposite Localrank, which to oversimplify it is a concept that rewards sites within a niche that have links from authoratative sites on that topic, baccarat sites linking to baccarat sites. That is not there at all these days, but if that idea was added to what is there now, it would make some really great results. Authoratativeness matters now, and hopefully the next Google tweak will make add localrank to the mix.
Also that filter nonsense was discredited in early December.
….huh?
Ok, what about the part where the article says that google penalizes links with unrelated sites and sites with low google rank? It seems to say that, although such links can increase general google rank, it will demote you for your keywords.
Anyone have the answer to this?:confused:
“Anyone have the answer to this?”
Yes, that is pure nonsense. If that were true, then all the newspaper sites that rank well for genre terms would have some sort of “penalty” because virtually ALL their linking would come from off-topic sites.
Additionally low PR links are still extremely valuable for their anchor text. Anchor text is just is less valuable than before (still the most important thing though.)
Sites like the notorious .md family still rank OK… but have dropped from #1 positions because they rely heavily on tens of thousands of no-PR anchor text links. This is not a sign of a penalty, but just that trash linking is slightly less valuable than before.
Originally posted by Classics
Yes, that is pure nonsense. If that were true, then all the newspaper sites that rank well for genre terms would have some sort of “penalty” because virtually ALL their linking would come from off-topic sites.[/B]
Ahhhh, now that makes sense! Thanks Classics. Nothing like pure logic to slice through the google myths.
