- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I’ve noticed that a lot of high PR portals have lost a ridiculous amount of PR!
dollarsgambling has gone from 8 to 0
easymoney 7 to3
casinochoice 7 to 1What’s going on? Has this happened to any of you guys, and are you worried there are some changes afoot with google?
Harv
Google is actively penalizing sites that purchased an excessive amount of unreciprocated links.
I have been told they are also scrutinizing CSS and Java scripts for artificial ranking “tricks”.
In discussing this with a few other Gambling webmasters we felt that Google may be shifting focus towards land based casinos and informational sites to the detriment of traditional online gambling portals. This remains to be seen, but there are some indictaions of this happening.
Originally posted by Professor
… we felt that Google may be shifting focus towards land based casinos and informational sites to the detriment of traditional online gambling portals.😮 IF thats true its probably just a matter of time before all our sites PR is raped! Lets hope not! I had a few sites go from 7-6 and others go from 6-5 … nothing went up this last shift.
Furthermore, if thats the case Im certain they will start to FROWN upon websites that have 10-20+ homepage link partners! I stated that was a horrible idea over a year ago – most ignored me and today some have 30+ heh!
ALSO – if your one of the pages in the exchange and your linking to a newly penalized site – you may want to GET OUT! Linking to a “new” site with a 0 is one thing, but linking to a naughty site is suicide!
if your one of the pages in the exchange and your linking to a newly penalized site – you may want to GET OUT! Linking to a “new” site with a 0 is one thing, but linking to a naughty site is suicide!
Definately true. I removed links to sites that have been penalized and I recommend everyone examine their current link partners.
Linking to penalized sites with definately impact your PR negatively.
Originally posted by Professor
Definately true. I removed links to sites that have been penalized and I recommend everyone examine their current link partners.Linking to penalized sites with definately impact your PR negatively.
Maybe we should keep a sticky topic some where listing penalized sites … Of course FIRST we would need to verify that the sites are in deed being penalized and its not some other variable responsible for a drop.
I second that.
I made this thread sticky.
I am a little hesitant to compile a PR blacklist in the public areas, but would consider doing so in the private forums.
I also have very bad news about Links Manager
😡 but will set up a seperate thread about my findings later today when I am finished with my update.Yes I was leaning toward a private area …
LOL – I think I hammered Links Manager enough in the past too! Ive never accepted links from LM sites … From my early GPWA days I have been a strong opponent to this link system.
I’ve gone through all my links and have compiled a list of sites who have suddenly become PR 0.
I haven’t included new sites – sites 3 months old or less, or sites whose pr rank went down, but not to zero. I figure it’s the ones who went to zero that are being penalized directly through google.
Any other suggestions as what to look for?
Originally posted by arkyt
I think I hammered Links Manager enough in the past too!I’d hope this thread stays public as arkyt has posted two little comments that lots of webmasters have ignored for a long time, and some are paying now.
Large amounts of front page links are a signal of pure spam. Whether a site is spammy or not isn’t really the point, Google can only algorithmically judge sites, not literally read their content. Sites with five-zillion-hyphens-in-every-file-name also send out a spam signal, even though there is no reason necessarily that those pages are spam. The fact however is pages like that often are spammy, so you start with off under a “yellow flag”, so to speak. It is easier to be judged harshly shoulkd other negative signals appear.
Any amount of off site links on a main page over ten was always a terrible idea, as are massive link directories. Google’s basic idea behind pagerank is a good one… when a site genuinely links to another site, it is a “vote” of confidence. This has lead to garbage link exchanges in every sector of the Internet where many webmasters simply will swap (or try to swap) with anybody and everybody.
Who you link to has mattered a lot for six months. if you link to someone who links to a spammy or garbage site, this can hurt you, and I expect it has been hurting a lot of people here who make many link swaps but don’t follow the daisy chain of who the other site links to… and who those sites link to, and so on.
dollars gambling, the .md sites, and other empires built on a foundation of non-genuine linking have been kicked into the dumper… and maybe some won’t agree with me, but I say: good.
My personal observation, and this isn’t exhaustive of course, mass link trading (or crosslinking) sites have lost PR while those with more higher quality linking have gained.
Don’t chop your content up onto microdomains; link to sites because you like their quality and/or they are linked to by quality sites; don’t use link exchange programs or software; definitely don’t link to huge numbers of related or unrelated sites from main pages; and *pay attention* to who your link partners link to… Google emphasized that in November and it’s even more important now.
Personally I don’t think a “blacklist” is appropriate either public or private, but I hope this stays out in public view — even I expect to get flamed by some links manager lovers….
Originally posted by Fergie
Any other suggestions as what to look for?Not really answering what you are asking, but the “related” search is tremendously helpful.
related:http://www.yahoo.com or whatever
If among a page’s related sites (aka “similar pages”) you find drastically off-topic or really pukey sites, this is a warning sign. Sometimes it just means someone who links to that page also links to crap… in other words it isn’t the fault of the page you are looking at… but this is a very helpful way to check out how Google is perceiving a page.
Well, I’m going to clean up the links on my sites. I’ve already started.
Better to have 20 links from good sites than 2000 links from just every site, so they say.
I’ve made Pokerbaron.com, and it’s only going to have good quality sites, even if there aren’t many. More as a service to visitors than for PR.
Frankly, I’m tired of the rediculous game of link exchanging just for the purpose of PR. It’s ludicrous. A huge industry has sprouted up just for the purpose of helping webmaster get links – all because of the incoming link hype with google.
Originally posted by Classics
Who you link to has mattered a lot for six months.I totally agree – ever since Florida or what every “they” liked to call it – the only links I have concentrated on are “targeted” and “quality” and from day 1 – I have never linked to Links Manager sites … I always called it a lazy mans tool – heh!
Also I have no problem with homepage links so long as they are not “over done” I have always went by your number “10” any more is too many IMHO.
Also I have no idea how to tell if a site has received a penalty – I dont think just because it shows a white bar means its been nabbed. I checked the sites listed above and they still rank very well for some keywords.
Also – I just redesigned one of my sites – uploaded some new files which goolge has never seen and they show a white bar not a gray – so how can you tell its a penalty – I dont know.
Ok, smarty-pants, where does linksmanager fit into this?
As far as a PR of zero goes, I was refering the the homepages, not interior pages. A site that goes from PR 6 or more to Zero, well, what other explaination can there be, unless they changed their domain name or something drastic like that?
There’s a lot of good information in this thread. I’m going to be doing some major reviewing and overhauling of some of my sites as a result of this.
