Skip to main content

Home/ DISC Inc/ Group items tagged Linking

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Rob Laporte

SEOmoz | Announcing SEOmoz's Index of the Web and the Launch of our Linkscape Tool - 0 views

  •  
    After 12 long months of brainstorming, testing, developing, and analyzing, the wait is finally over. Today, I'm ecstatic to announce some very big developments here at SEOmoz. They include: * An Index of the World Wide Web - 30 billion pages (and growing!), refreshed monthly, built to help SEOs and businesses acquire greater intelligence about the Internet's vast landscape * Linkscape - a tool enabling online access to the link data provided by our web index, including ordered, searchable lists of links for sites & pages, and metrics to help judge their value. * A Fresh Design - that gives SEOmoz a more usable, enjoyable, and consistent browsing experience * New Features for PRO Membership - including more membership options, credits to run advanced Linkscape reports (for all PRO members), and more. Since there's an incredible amount of material, I'll do my best to explain things clearly and concisely, covering each of the big changes. If you're feeling more visual, you can also check out our Linkscape comic, which introduces the web index and tool in a more humorous fashion: Check out the Linkscape Comic SEOmoz's Index of the Web For too long, data that is essential to the practice of search engine optimization has been inaccessible to all but a handful of search engineers. The connections between pages (links) and the relationship between links, URLs, and the web as a whole (link metrics) play a critical role in how search engines analyze the web and judge individual sites and pages. Professional SEOs and site owners of all kinds deserve to know more about how their properties are being referenced in such a system. We believe there are thousands of valuable applications for this data and have already put some effort into retrieving a few fascinating statistics: * Across the web, 58% of all links are to internal pages on the same domain, 42% point to pages off the linking site. * 1.83%
Rob Laporte

Google Webmaster Central Hosting "Link Week" - 0 views

  • Oct 7, 2008 at 8:11am Eastern by Barry Schwartz    Google Webmaster Central Hosting “Link Week” This week at the Google Webmaster Central blog, Google has a series of blog posts all about links. The first two blog posts are live and are named: Links information straight from the source Importance of link architecture Google explains that they will be writing about three main topics this week. (1) Internal links, the links that you have within your site. That post is already live and is about the how you should structure your link structure for best search engine visibility. (2) Outbound links or the links you post on your pages to other sites. I assume Google will discuss the value of these links and who you should and should not link to. Clearly, think about your user here and not the search engine. (3) Inbound links or the external sites that are linking to your site. I assume Google left this for last, because this may be the most interesting topic. Google plans to bust some myths, so it will be interesting to see what they say on the topic of links hurting your site. Time will tell - but stay tuned for more information. Postscript: Here is Google’s post on linking outbound, which has useful tips for beginners on who and when to link out. In addition, it tells you how to handle user generated content links. Postscript 2: I was a bit let down by Google’s inbound link post.
  •  
    Oct 7, 2008 at 8:11am Eastern by Barry Schwartz Google Webmaster Central Hosting "Link Week" This week at the Google Webmaster Central blog, Google has a series of blog posts all about links. The first two blog posts are live and are named: * Links information straight from the source * Importance of link architecture Google explains that they will be writing about three main topics this week. (1) Internal links, the links that you have within your site. That post is already live and is about the how you should structure your link structure for best search engine visibility. (2) Outbound links or the links you post on your pages to other sites. I assume Google will discuss the value of these links and who you should and should not link to. Clearly, think about your user here and not the search engine. (3) Inbound links or the external sites that are linking to your site. I assume Google left this for last, because this may be the most interesting topic. Google plans to bust some myths, so it will be interesting to see what they say on the topic of links hurting your site. Time will tell - but stay tuned for more information. Postscript: Here is Google's post on linking outbound, which has useful tips for beginners on who and when to link out. In addition, it tells you how to handle user generated content links. Postscript 2: I was a bit let down by Google's inbound link post.
Rob Laporte

Effective Internal Linking Strategies That Prevent Duplicate Content Nonsense - Search ... - 0 views

  •  
    The funny thing about duplicate content is that you don't really have to have it for it to appear as if you do have it. But whether you have duplicate content on your site or not, to the search engines appearances are everything . The engines are pretty much just mindless bots that can't reason. They only see what is, or appears to be there and then do what the programmers have determined through the algorithm. How you set up your internal linking structure plays a significant role in whether you set yourself up to appear if you have duplicate content on your site or not. Some things we do without thinking, setting ourselves up for problems ahead. With a little foresight and planning, you can prevent duplicate content issues that are a result of poor internal link development. For example, we know that when we link to site.com/page1.html in one place but then link to www.site.com/page1.html in another, that we are really linking to the same page. But to the search engines, the www. can make a difference. They'll often look at those two links as links to two separate pages. And then analyze each page as if it is a duplicate of the other. But there is something we can do with our internal linking to alleviate this kind of appearance of duplicate content. Link to the www. version only Tomorrow I'll provide information on how to set up your site so when someone types in yoursite.com they are automatically redirected to www.yoursite.com. It's a great permanent fix, but as a safety measure, I also recommend simply adjusting all your links internally to do the same. Example of not linking to www. version. In the image above you can see that the domain contains the www., but when you mouse over any of the navigation links, they point to pages without the www. Even if you have a permanent redirect in place, all the links on your site should point to the proper place. At the very least you're making the search engines and visitors NOT have to redirect. At best, should y
Rob Laporte

Limit Anchor Text Links To 55 Characters In Length? | Hobo - 0 views

  •  
    Limit Anchor Text Links To 55 Characters In Length? Blurb by Shaun Building LinksAs a seo I wanted to know - how many words or characters does Google count in a link? What's best practice when creating links - internal, or external? What is the optimal length of a HTML link? It appears the answer to the question 'how many words in a text link" is 55 characters, about 8-10 words. Why is this important to know? 1. You get to understand how many words Google will count as part of a link 2. You can see why you should keep titles to a maximum amount of characters 3. You can see why your domain name should be short and why urls should be snappy 4. You can see why you should rewrite your urls (SEF) 5. It's especially useful especially when thinking about linking internally, via body text on a page. I wanted to see how many words Google will count in one 'link' to pass on anchor text power to a another page so I did a test a bit like this one below; 1. pointed some nonsense words in one massive link, 50 words long, at the home page of a 'trusted' site 2. each of the nonsense words were 6 characters long 3. Then I did a search for something generic that the site would rank no1 for, and added the nonsense words to the search, so that the famous "This word only appear in links to the site" (paraphrase) kicked in 4. This I surmised would let me see how many of the nonsense words Google would attribute to the target page from the massive 50 word link I tried to get it to swallow. The answer was….. 1. Google counted 8 words in the anchor text link out of a possible 50. 2. It seemed to ignore everything else after the 8th word 3. 8 words x 6 characters = 48 characters + 7 spaces = a nice round and easy to remember number - 55 Characters. So, a possible best practice in number of words in an anchor text might be to keep a link under 8 words but importantly under 55 characters because everything after it is ignored
Rob Laporte

Google Webmaster Tools Now Provide Source Data For Broken Links - 0 views

  • Google has also added functionality to the Webmaster Tools API to enable site owners to provide input on control settings (such as preferred domain and crawl rate) that could previously only be done via the application. As they note in the blog post: “This is especially useful if you have a large number of sites. With the Webmaster Tools API, you can perform hundreds of operations in the time that it would take to add and verify a single site through the web interface.”
  •  
    Oct 13, 2008 at 5:28pm Eastern by Vanessa Fox Google Webmaster Tools Now Provide Source Data For Broken Links Ever since Google Webmaster Tools started reporting on broken links to a site, webmasters have been asking for the sources of those links. Today, Google has delivered. From Webmaster Tools you can now see the page that each broken link is coming from. This information should be of great help for webmasters in ensuring the visitors find their sites and that their links are properly credited. The value of the 404 error report Why does Google report broken links in the first place? As Googlebot crawls the web, it stores a list of all the links it finds. It then uses that list for a couple of things: * As the source list to crawl more pages on the web * To help calculate PageRank If your site has a page with the URL www.example.com/mypage.html and someone links to it using the URL www.example.com/mpage.html, then a few things can happen: * Visitors who click on that link arrive at the 404 page for your site and aren't able to get to the content they were looking for * Googlebot follows that link and instead of finding a valid page of your site to crawl, receives a 404 page * Google can't use that link to give a specific page on your site link credit (because it has no page to credit) Clearly, knowing about broken links to your site is valuable. The best solution in these situations generally is to implement a 301 redirect from the incorrect URL to the one. If you see a 404 error for www.example.com/mpage.html, then you can be pretty sure they meant to link to www.example.com/mypage.html. By implementing the redirect, visitors who click the link find the right content, Googlebot finds the content, and mypage.html gets credit for the link. In addition, you can scan your site to see if any of the broken links are internal, and fix them. But finding broken links on your site can be tedious (although it's valuable to run a broken l
Rob Laporte

Link building and social media | Search Engine Optimization | Search Engines - 0 views

  • Link building and social media PDF  | Print |  E-mail Wednesday, 29 April 2009 10:10 It’s all about the secondary links silly Time and time again I see folks in the SEO world talking about getting links from social media websites. Many times this advice will include finding ‘followed’ links and even lists of ‘dofollow’ social media sites. This is quite strange and bewildering to me as the holy grail of link building in SM isn’t getting a link from the actual site…. but getting the secondary links that follow viral content. You see, one shouldn’t be using the state of the links on the site as the measure… and such approaches are often even frowned upon by many in the biz as noted in this recent Sphinn thread. Regardless of the emotional reaction, the whole concept is flawed. I could give a rat’s ass if the links on a given site (including social and blogs) are followed because that was never the consideration in the first place. Secondary links are the goal The main thing, from a link building perspective, is not really about direct links but the secondary links one garners from having a viral story on said site. If one gets a hot story on places such as Digg or Twitter, how many links are being generated? This is where the story begins for link builders. Having a viral story make the rounds can often result in a great number of back links that can often be of far more value than those single authority links social spammers seem bent on getting. This is the greater value to be had from SM sites for the adventurous link builder. Now, we can discuss brand development and authority building as an important aspect of content distribution, (and social media) but let’s stick to the potential of them for link building. When we look to target a given social site what do we want to know? Is the site targeted? Meaning does it have active categories relating to our market. What’s the demographic? Is there a viable number or market related peeps? What’s the reach? Is it syndicated heavily, (RSS, Twitter, Blogs, Scrapers..etc..) What links are top stories getting? (is the demo a linking group) You get the idea… we want the best possible opportunity for generating secondary links from the primary exposure. That is the goal at the end of the day (from a link building perspective).   Don’t be short sighted This is actually true of a lot of content distribution/placement channels. You shouldn’t be as concerned about the type of link as the ability to generate links from the situation. What would you rather have? Scenario 1 – a followed link from a marginally popular location such as http://www.under-link.com/ Scenario 2 – a nofollowed link from a popular site (or maybe dropped by a top Twitterer). Scenario 3 – a followed link buried on a popular site (poor exposure) If you said anything but Scenario 2 then please move to the front of the class, because you are failing sadly. Ultimately the actual status of the link is not going to be nearly as important as the ability to get the content in front of as many folks as possible. If you and the content team have done your job, and chosen the right locales, then you should end up with some great secondary links.
Rob Laporte

There is no penalty for buying links! - 0 views

  • There is no penalty for buying links! There, I said it. That’s what I believe is true; there is no such thing as a ‘you have been buying links so you should suffer’ penalty. At least, not if you do it correctly. I’ll make some statements about buying links that probably not everybody will agree on, but this is what I consider to be the truth. If you don’t publish your link buying tactics yourself and if your website’s link profile doesn’t contain >90% paid links, then: Buying links cannot get you penalized;Buying links from obvious link networks only results in backlinks with little to no search engine value;Buying links ninja style will continue to get you killer rankings;Selling links can only disable your ability to pass link juice or PR (but you might want to read this);Google will never be able to detect all paid links Just about every time the topic finally seems to be left alone, someone out there heats up the good old paid link debate again. This time, Rand Fishkin (unintentionally) causes the discussion to emerge once again. By showing the buying and selling link tactics of several websites on SEOmoz’ blog (this info has been removed now), he made it very easy for the Paid Link Police to add some more websites to the list of websites to check out while building the Paid Link Neglecting Algorithm. Several people got all wound up because of this, including (at first) me, because these sites would more than likely receive a penalty (just checked, none of them has been penalized yet). However, it is almost impossible for Google to penalize you for buying links for your website. At least, not if you didn’t scream “Hey, I’m artificially inflating my link popularity!” on your OWN website. David Airey penalized? Jim Boykin analyzed his penalty earlier and the same thing happened here. In some cases, it may seem that certain websites have been penalized for buying links. What in fact happened, is that the link juice tap of some obvious paid links has been closed, what resulted in less link juice, followed by lower rankings. In most other cases, you can buy all the links you want and not get penalized. You could buy the same links for your competition, right? And if Google states that Spammy Backlinks can’t Hurt You, paid backlinks probably can’t hurt you either. This basically is the same thing. The worst thing that can happen is that you buy hundreds of text links that only provide traffic. And, if you managed to buy the right ones, there’s nothing wrong with that.
Rob Laporte

Page 3 - Textlinkbrokers.com & text-link-ads.com - SEO Chat - 0 views

  • Jarrod u seem pretty convincing here. I sent a mail to Brigette (ur account manager) last month and asked some few simple questions regarding the services. Not a single answer was convincing enough to buy your services and that's when i decided not to purchase links through u. Here are the excerpts: Quote: 1. What if we decide to discontinue your service in the future? Do we lose all the purchased back links in that case? TLB: If you rent links, they would come down. However, if you purchase products that are permanently placed, we do not take them down. But you don't place text links permanently. Even your permanent package gives only 6 months guarantee. Quote: 2. How we can secure the ownership of our purchased links? What if the webmaster removed the link we have purchased after some time or what if he moved the link to some other location or some other web page or changed the anchor text of the link or added large number of other external links (may be from our competitors) and thus reducing our link weight or what if he made our link no follow or what if he deleted the web page or shut down the website? Can we claim any compensation or refund in that case? TLB: Each of our products has different minimums and guarantees. Our permanent links that are included in the “Booster Package” have a 3 month guarantee. During this time we have a script that ensures your link stays live. If, for some reason, it were to come down we would replace it free of charge. Beyond that, you would have no recourse. However, if you purchase a permanent link package, they have a 6 month guarantee that works the same way. Do you call this a convincing reply? Quote: 3. How you can ensure us that you will not get our website penalized or banned by Google through your back links? What if our website gets penalized or banned by Google because of the link you have purchased for us? What is your policy in that case? TLB: We take every step possible to ensure that does not happen. We do things very differently than most link building companies. We do not use software, feeds or auto generated code of any kind. Each of our links are manually placed on 100% SEO friendly sites. Everyone who is accepted into our inventory goes through an extensive approval process. We deny applications daily for not meeting the large number of criteria our Quality Assurance team looks at. Once they are accepted into inventory, their information is not posted on the web site. They are not allowed to post anything on their site that says they are affiliated with us in any way. They are not asked to and not allowed to backlink to us under any circumstances. We take the protection of our Inventory Partners and our clients very seriously. If a potential client goes to our website to view inventory, they will only see general information such as a description, page rank, site age, number of outbound links, etc. The only way to view the actual url is to sign a non-disclosure agreement. That is only done after speaking with a Customer Service Representative or Account Manager who would create the list for you. So, as you can see, for years we have done everything we can do to protect our inventory partners as well as our clients. Our goals is to make you successful so that we can continue with a long term business relationship. If we do not protect our partners and they get penalized, your links will not pass SEO value. Therefore, we take that very seriously. Your so called forbidden inventory is just one report away from Google web spam team. Once identified, everyone associated with it will bust like a bubble. IMO that's the risk rand was talking about.
  • Himanshu160, I only wish that I could replicate myself, wouldn't that be great. I would be happy to discuss other options with you outside of the forums or get you to one of our senior account reps. I do not handle very many sales and this isn't the place for it. As for our perm links, most of those are placed on sites that we do not control thus it becomes too costly to guarantee them forever. We have found that if they have stayed up for 6 months the churn rate is fairly low after that.. The 3 month guarantee is being offered at a cheaper rate and usually only used in our bundles. Again if it has stayed live for 3 months the churn rate isn't going to be very high after that. There are advantages to being on our controlled inventory but also some disadvantages. With our controlled inventory we can make sure every link we place stays up, those tend to be the links we charge monthly, although we have done some custom perm links on controlled inventory. The disadvantage is that if someone reports one of our controlled sites to Google it can loose value, of course some sites are at more risk than others because they sell a lot of links or they sell homepage links in the sidebar etc.. We do have inventory that is cleaner than others and we can even do exclusive deals so that you are the only one on the site. It all depends on your budget. For most low competition keywords one of our cheap link bundles is all that is needed. Sure some of the links will go down over time, and yes Google may devalue some. However there are always new links being built to replace the few that go down so the results are a nice increase in rankings over time.
Rob Laporte

How Google's Selective Link Priority Impacts SEO (2023 Study) - 0 views

  • How Google’s Selective Link Priority Impacts SEO (2023 Study)
  • First Link Priority
  • only have selected one of the links from a given page.
  • ...6 more annotations...
  • Google only counted the first anchor text
  • So even if you manage to figure out how we currently do it today, then that’s not necessarily how we’ll do it tomorrow, or how it always is across all websites.
  • Test #1 Takeaway: Google seems to be able to count multiple anchor texts on the same page to the same target, at least if one of the links is an image.
  • Test #2 Takeaway: When Google encountered two text links followed by an image link, Google indexed the first text and image anchors only.
  • Test #3 Takeaway: When Google encountered two text links followed by an image link and finally another text link, Google indexed the first text and image anchors only.
  • How to Optimize For Google’s Selective Link Priority Let’s be clear: Selective Link Priority most likely isn’t going to make a huge difference in your SEO strategy, but it can make a difference, especially in tie-breaker situations. In particular, here are five internal linking practices in a Selective Link Priority world: Be aware when linking on a page multiple times to the same URL that Google may not “count” all of your anchor text. When in doubt, you should likely prioritize both the first text link and image links on the page. Remember that each link to a URL—regardless of anchor text—has the potential to increase that URL’s PageRank. Don’t leave image alt attributes empty, and remember to vary them from any text link anchors. Not only can Google index the alt attribute as a separate anchor, but this gives you the chance to further increase your anchor text variations. Sites with smaller external link profiles may wish to limit the number of navigational links in preference of in-body text links. The reason is that if Google does indeed tend to prefer the first links on the page—and these are navigational—this limits the number of anchor text variations you can send to any page. (This isn’t a hard-and-fast rule. In fact, it’s a nuanced, complex subject that may warrant a whole other post.) The most important thing to remember is this – anchor text is a powerful ranking signal, even for internal links. Carefully choosing your anchor text—while avoiding over-optimization—can make a difference in winning SEO. If your SEO game is otherwise strong, you may be able to get away with ignoring Google’s Selective Link Priority rules (as most sites do already.) But you should at least be aware of how it works and what it means to your strategy.
jack_fox

Defense Against the Dark Arts: Why Negative SEO Matters, Even if Rankings Are Unaffecte... - 0 views

  • if you get 100,000 links pointing to your site, it is going to push you over the limit of the number of links that Google Search Console will give back to you in the various reports about links
  • Google cuts off at 100,000 total links
  • even though we know Google is ignoring most of these links, they don't label that for us in any kind of useful fashion. Even after we can get access to all of that link data, all of those hundreds of thousands of spammy links, we still can't be certain which ones matter and which ones don't.
  • ...8 more annotations...
  • if somebody syndicates an article of yours that has let's say eight links to other internal pages and they syndicate it to 10,000 websites, well, then you've just got 80,000 new what should have been internal links, now external links pointing to your site.
  • Nofollowed malware links in UGC
  • there are ways to make it look like there are links on your site that aren't really under your control through things like HTML injection
  • it's not so much about bowling you out of the search engines. It's about making it so that SEO just isn't workable anymore.
  • How do you fight back against negative SEO? 1. Canonical burn pages
  • Embedded styled attribution
  • Link Lists
  • As you get links, real links, good links, add them to a Link List, and that way you will always have a list of links that you know are good, that you can compare against the list of links that might be sullied by a negative SEO campaign.
Rob Laporte

Disavowing in 2019 and Beyond - Should you be auditing your links? - 1 views

  • We decided at MHC to stop offering link audits as we did not feel that it was right to offer a service that could be completely unnecessary. However, we found that a few clients were quite insistent and wanted to give disavowing a try. We filed a few disavows and were incredibly pleased to see that some of these sites saw nice gains a few weeks to months later.
  • Google’s guide on linking.
  • We’ll hopefully soon be putting out a thorough guide to disavowing. For now though, we would recommend that you only file a disavow if you are confident in understanding what Google considers a natural link to be. Also, if you are having an SEO company audit your links, we would recommend that you only use companies that manually review your links and have good knowledge of Google’s guidelines on linking. If your SEO company is filing disavows based mostly on recommendations from tools, we feel that this work is unlikely to result in improvements in ranking.
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • Where we really would be worried is if a competitor took the time to get articles published on authoritative sites by paying for links from journalists, exchanging links with prominent bloggers, or doing other things that go against Google’s guidelines. The problem though, is that initially, this type of link has the potential to actually INCREASE your rankings if not detected as unnatural by Google. Also, this type of link is hard to get! A negative SEO campaign of this nature would take an incredible amount of effort.
  • We also have a theory that would negate a lot of negative SEO attempts. (So sorry for the bad pun.). We think that it is possible that Google is only passing PageRank through sites with good E-A-T (expertise, authoritativeness, and trust). If this is true, then most links on the web, including the vast majority of negative SEO links are simply being ignored. Also, the only links that a competitor could place that would cause Google to distrust the site, would be ones that conversely could end up being fantastic links that have the potential to improve your rankings.We still think that this type of sneakiness is possible in some highly competitive, big money verticals. If you are noticing a large influx of links like this that really do look like sophisticated attempts to manipulate Google rankings, then, in some cases it may be a good idea to pre-emptively disavow those links. But be careful. You could do more harm than good!
Rob Laporte

SEOmoz | I Don't Buy Links - 0 views

  • How Google Can Discover Paid Links A while back I did a post called 15 Methods for Paid Link Detection. Here is a list of the methods I discussed in that post: Links Labeled as Advertisements Site Wides Links Are Sold By a Link Agency Selling Site Has Information on How to Buy a Text Link Ad Relevance of Your Link Relevance of Nearby Links Advertising Location Type Someone Reports Your Site for Buying Links Someone Reports Your Site for Some Other Reason Someone Reports the Site you Bought Links from for Selling Links Someone Reports the Site you Bought Links from for Some Other Reason Disgruntled Employee Leaves Your Company, and Reports Your Site Disgruntled Employee Leaves the Agency Your Used, and Reports Your Site Disgruntled Employee Leaves the Company of the Site You Bought Links from, and Reports Your Site Internal Human Review There are two major methods I want to emphasize here. These are: 1. Your competitor can report you. It's the grim truth that your paid links can be reported by your competitor. There is a form built right into Google Webmaster Tools. Here is what it looks like:
Rob Laporte

Rand Fishkin | SEO Blog - 0 views

  • Why Doesn’t Rand Fishkin say the Words? October 2, 2009 by Roger · 2 CommentsFiled under: SEO General  There’s a very informative video on SEOmoz’s Whiteboard Friday about link volume verses link quality. At about the 5:00 minute mark you can see Rand Fishkin holding himself back trying not to say the B word … “buy links”. He does say barter. Does that mean exchange links for money? I guess it could. The sad truth is that if you are in a very competitive market like travel, car hire, hotels, and you aren’t a top 200 brand, the only way you are going to get on the front page of Google is to BUY LINKS. Cheap hotels Sydney is an example of the sort of search term you would probably need to buy links for. $1000 to $2000 per month for some quality links should do the trick which is still cheap compared to other forms of mass media, and I do see Google as a form of mass media. Yep, buy links. But that’s Blackhat you say and Google doesn’t like it I can hear some people say. It seems it’s OK to buy links if Google gets the cash via their Adwords money machine, but if you get caught selling or buying links, then watch out. Ever wondered why Google uses a very pale yellow background on their Adwords ads? Why not red or blue, or even a muted grey? You know the answer don’t you?  I suspect over 30% of the market don’t even know the difference between Adwords ads and organic links. What number do you believe? And if you believe the white-hat nonsense about not buying links you will still be spending time and/or money on article marketing, press release submissions, forum signatures, link exchanges, and other link-building methods.
Rob Laporte

Nofollow Monstrosity - 0 views

  •  
    # Many people link to social sites from their blogs and websites, and they rarely put 'nofollow' on their sites. Most social sites, on the other hand, started putting by default 'nofollow' on all external links. Consequence? For example, bookmark your new site 'example123.com' at 'stumbleupon.com'. If you google for 'example123′, stumbleupon.com page about it (with no content but the link and title) will be on top, while your site (with actual content) that you searched for will be below. Imagine what effect this PageRank capitalization has when you search for things other than your domain name! # Each site and blog owner is contributing to this unknowingly and voluntarily. Do any of these look familiar? social bookmarks Most blogs and sites have at least few of these on almost every single page. Not a single one of these buttons has 'nofollow', meaning that people give a very good chunk of their site's importance to these social sites (hint: importance that you give to these buttons is importance taken away from other internal links on your site). Most of social sites however, do have 'nofollow' on a link pointing back to peoples sites after users link to them for being good. Conclusion, people give them a lot of credit on almost every page, while these sites give nothing in return. (Two 'good' sites among these, that I know of, are Digg that does not have 'nofollow', and Slashdot that tries to identify real spam and puts 'nofollow' on those links only. There are probably few more.) # This can be easily prevented, and PageRank can be re-distributed, in no time! Solution is very simple. 'Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.' If you have a WordPress blog (as millions of internet users do), download plugins Antisocial and Nofollow Reciprocity. First one puts 'nofollow' on above buttons, second puts 'nofollow' on all external links pointing to 'bad' sites. If you are using some other blogging app
Rob Laporte

Giving Links Away - Search Engine Watch - 0 views

  • Enter Siloing and PageRank Sculpting This is simply the activity of controlling what pages of your site share their link love. You do this by adding a "nofollow" attribute to any link that you don't want the search engines to give credit to. Take the example Matt Cutts gives. Maybe you have a friend who is a total underground, blackhat, do-no-good, evil-empire, anarchist spammer. You know he's bad to the bone. But you have a soft place in your heart for him and you want others to check out his site. All you have to do is add a nofollow attribute to the link. It would look like this: <a href="http://www.total-underground-blackhat-do-no-good-evil-empire-anarchist-spammer.com/" rel="nofollow">a blackhat spammer</a>. In this article, Joost de Valk, a Dutch SEO and Web developer, quotes Matt Cutts as saying, "There's no stigma to using nofollow, even on your own internal links; for Google, nofollowed links are dropped out of our link graph; we don't even use such links for discovery." Joost's article explains PageRank sculpting in more detail if you find this topic fascinating. His article also talks about "siloing." He points to an article on BruceClay.com that discussed this concept in a great amount of detail. Siloing is the idea of only linking out to other pages on your site and other outside resources that relate to that specific category or topic. So, if you had a cherry ice cream cone page, you would only link to resources discussing cherry ice cream cones. Information about chocolate ice cream cones and ice cream sundaes would either not be linked to or would be linked to using the nofollow tag like I showed you above. Controlling Link Flow Using Robots.txt Finally, there's more than one way to block link love. You can also add this information to your robots.txt file. This handy file goes in the root folder of your Web server and tells the search engines how to not spider and index all sorts of things.
Rob Laporte

Google & Microsoft Share Advice For Webmasters, SEOs - 0 views

  • On the Live Search blog, Nathan Buggia recaps his SMX East presentation on Webmaster Guidelines, shares the slides from his talk, and expands on topics such as paid links, cloaking, and website penalties. He shares some detail on how Live Search handles paid links: Essentially we look at each link individually to understand the degree to which the site is really endorsing the link. So, while we most likely will not ban your site for buying or selling a few links, it is also likely that they may not actually end up providing any value either.
  •  
    On the Live Search blog, Nathan Buggia recaps his SMX East presentation on Webmaster Guidelines, shares the slides from his talk, and expands on topics such as paid links, cloaking, and website penalties. He shares some detail on how Live Search handles paid links: Essentially we look at each link individually to understand the degree to which the site is really endorsing the link. So, while we most likely will not ban your site for buying or selling a few links, it is also likely that they may not actually end up providing any value either.
Rob Laporte

Google Removes Directory Links From Webmaster Guidelines - 0 views

  • Oct 3, 2008 at 9:48am Eastern by Barry Schwartz    Google Removes Directory Links From Webmaster Guidelines Brian Ussery reported that Google has dropped two important bullet points from the Google Webmaster Guidelines. Those bullet points include: Have other relevant sites link to yours. Submit your site to relevant directories such as the Open Directory Project and Yahoo!, as well as to other industry-specific expert sites. At the same time, Google Blogoscoped reported that Google removed the dictionary link in the search results, at the top right of the results page. Related, I am not sure. I speculated that maybe Google is going to go after more directories in the future. By removing those two bullet points, maybe Google can do this - without seeming all that hypocritical. In addition, I noted a comment from Google John Mueller at a Google Groups thread where he explained the logic behind removing those two points: I wouldn’t necessarily assume that we’re devaluing Yahoo’s links, I just think it’s not one of the things we really need to recommend. If people think that a directory is going to bring them lots of visitors (I had a visitor from the DMOZ once), then it’s obviously fine to get listed there. It’s not something that people have to do though :-). As you can imagine, this is causing a bit of a commotion in some of the forums. Some are worried, some are mad, and some are confused by the change.
  •  
    Oct 3, 2008 at 9:48am Eastern by Barry Schwartz Google Removes Directory Links From Webmaster Guidelines Brian Ussery reported that Google has dropped two important bullet points from the Google Webmaster Guidelines. Those bullet points include: * Have other relevant sites link to yours. * Submit your site to relevant directories such as the Open Directory Project and Yahoo!, as well as to other industry-specific expert sites. At the same time, Google Blogoscoped reported that Google removed the dictionary link in the search results, at the top right of the results page. Related, I am not sure. I speculated that maybe Google is going to go after more directories in the future. By removing those two bullet points, maybe Google can do this - without seeming all that hypocritical. In addition, I noted a comment from Google John Mueller at a Google Groups thread where he explained the logic behind removing those two points: I wouldn't necessarily assume that we're devaluing Yahoo's links, I just think it's not one of the things we really need to recommend. If people think that a directory is going to bring them lots of visitors (I had a visitor from the DMOZ once), then it's obviously fine to get listed there. It's not something that people have to do though :-). As you can imagine, this is causing a bit of a commotion in some of the forums. Some are worried, some are mad, and some are confused by the change.
Jennifer Williams

Web Links from the Search Engine's Perspective at RustyBrick - 0 views

  •  
    By the end of this short article you should be able to understand: 1. What Web links are 2. The difference between incoming links and outgoing links 3. The different terminology used in the SEO community to describe some links 4. How search engines view links 5. and what links represent to the search engines (natural vs. unnatural linking).
Jennifer Williams

Nofollow Link Social Media | SEO Training - 0 views

  •  
    The Nofollow Link & Social Media Published by Your SEO Mentor under SEO, Social Media Aug 23 2008 There has been a lot of questions about how Social Media is affecting the SEO industry. The question I would like to ask is how can it help the SEO industry and how will affect the SEO for my clients sites and my own. The major issue with Social Media sites and how they play a role in your SEO these days is a majority of them (especially the big boys e.g. Twitter) use the Nofollow link. "Well your asking what does this mean and why do I need to worry about it." First of all don't worry about it, this is not the end of the world but what it means is that going to all these major social media and networking sites and linking back to your website will for the most part have no affect on your search engine results. The NoFollow link (e.g. ) was originally created to block search engines from following links in blog comments, this was due to the very high amount of blog comment spamming. The wonderful Wikipedia definition says, "nofollow is an HTML attribute value used to instruct some search engines that a hyperlink should not influence the link target's ranking in the search engine's index. It is intended to reduce the effectiveness of certain types of search engine spam, thereby improving the quality of search engine results and preventing spamdexing from occurring in the first place." With Social Media sites popping up daily and with them being very easy to place user generated content and links spammers began the same old routine and therefore we suffer from their actions. The top social media and networking sites quickly found that they too needed to use the nofollow attribute to help reduce the amount of spam submitted. So for the most part placing a link on Social Media sites will not directly help your search engine optimization efforts. That doesn't mean Social Media can not help in gaining valuable links to
  •  
    Current Top 20 Social Bookmarking sites that Dofollow
Rob Laporte

NoFollow | Big Oak SEO Blog - 0 views

  • And while the business networking aspect is great, I’m writing to tell you it can be useful for your SEO efforts too, specifically link building. You may not know this, but LinkedIn does not employ the nofollow attribute on its links, like most other social networking sites. So that means we can use LinkedIn responsibly to build some nice one-way links to our sites and blogs. Even better your employees can use this to build some SEO-friendly links to your company site.
  • So the days of parsing links onto high PageRank Flickr pages are over. Or are they? No. Let’s examine why in list form. Let’s examine how you can use the remaining scraps of link juice from Flickr in your SEO campaigns. 1.) Flickr has not added nofollow to discussion boards. For those of you who liked to scout out high PageRank pages and just drop your link as a comment to the photo, which could be accomplished easily if you owned a link-laundering website, you can still do this in the Flickr group discussion boards. Flickr has not yet added nofollow tags to those, and given the preponderance of discussions that revolve around people sharing photos, you can just as easily drop relevant external links in the discussion and reap link juice benefits. 2.) Flickr has not added nofollow to personal profile pages. If you have a personal profile page, you can place targeted anchor text on it, point links at it, and receive full SEO benefit as it gains PageRank. 3.) Flickr has not added nofollow to group pages. If you own a Flickr group, you can still put as many links as you wish on the main group page without fear of them being turned into nofollow. Many Flickr personal profile and group pages gain toolbar PR just by having the link spread around in-house, so it’s not that hard to make those pages accumulate PR. Google seems to be very generous in that regard. There’s a lot of PR to be passed around through Flickr apparently. So, the glory days of Flickr SEO may be over (unless Yahoo does the improbable and flips the switch back), but Rome didn’t burn to rubble in a day, so we might as well make the most of Flickr before it completely collapses.
1 - 20 of 392 Next › Last »
Showing 20 items per page