homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.211.95.201
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
Forum Library, Charter, Moderator: open

Google News Archive Forum

This 104 message thread spans 4 pages: < < 104 ( 1 2 [3] 4 > >     
Backlinks appear to have been updated
Update of backlinks
LukeC




msg:166783
 5:35 pm on Oct 16, 2004 (gmt 0)

Backlinks - updated today in the UK

 

PhraSEOlogy




msg:166843
 3:55 am on Oct 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

Google is becoming like a girlfriend, unpredictable and frustrating

And sometimes you just have to dump her for something better

Liane




msg:166844
 4:25 am on Oct 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

Google is becoming like a girlfriend, unpredictable and frustrating at times but you just gotta love her.

And when you manage to surpass a competitor in the SERPS, doesn't it feel great!? Like .... yes, ha! Take THAT!

If I were a search engine algo programmer and was able to confound thousands of webmasters trying to figure out how my algorithm worked, I might react exactly the same way.

I can just see the Cheshire Cat type grins at the Googleplex when they read these threads. I think Google is very predictable! ... they love to keep us guessing!

The trick is to be willing to try to keep up with them. ;)

Macro




msg:166845
 11:01 am on Oct 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

Guys, am I missing something?

Over all the recent backlink problems I've been using "+www.mysite.+com" and I get all the backlinks I need. It's not perfect but isn't it a pretty close approximation to a properly working "link:" command?

BillyS




msg:166846
 11:34 am on Oct 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

I noticed this morning that PR has changed in the google directory categories that I follow.

HitProf




msg:166847
 12:15 pm on Oct 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

Marco what you miss are all the sites that link to you with other anchors.

What jou do find is a bunch of sites mentioning you but not neccessarily link to you. Those are opportunities :)

The link: command is useless but that's nothing new. Still wondering why it exists in the first place it doesn't answer the question.

Macro




msg:166848
 12:59 pm on Oct 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

Ah!

bwelford




msg:166849
 1:04 pm on Oct 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

BillyS, I read elsewhere about the Google Directory updating but I don't see it. The Directory has always shown a PR for my website that doesn't agree with the Google Toolbar display and it continues to show a different PR. :(

BillyS




msg:166850
 1:31 pm on Oct 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

bwelford:

Several categories in the Google directory that I follow updated in the last 12 hours. I will also say that looking at snapshots of these categories, I believe a downward correction to PR is occuring - for those sites that jumped up big time last update.

I also agree with all the posts stating that the directory green bar did not align with the toolbar until recently. I think the directory is a more accurate indicator of PR because it has continued to move each month prior to an index update. This leads me to believe that PR is still calculated monthly.

bumpski




msg:166851
 1:45 pm on Oct 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

[google.com...]

Some words, when followed by a colon, have special meanings to Google. One such word for Google is the link: operator. The query link:siteURL shows you all the pages that point to that URL.

[google.com...]

The query "link:" will list webpages that have links to the specified webpage. For instance, [link:www.google.com] will list webpages that have links pointing to the Google homepage. Note there can be no space between the "link:" and the web page url.

So even the documentation is misleading. The documentaion always trails the engineering, and once it reaches marketing, look out!

tomasz




msg:166852
 3:16 am on Oct 25, 2004 (gmt 0)

Can you explain why link update has been rolled back?

caveman




msg:166853
 3:44 am on Oct 26, 2004 (gmt 0)

Seems to me that if they were rolled back, they were just re-rolled out again.

survivor




msg:166854
 4:17 am on Oct 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

I'm seeing updated backlinks again. Same as the temporary numbers we saw a few weeks ago. Anyone else see this?

McMohan




msg:166855
 4:49 am on Oct 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

Anyone else seeing this?

No. Not from here. Google IP - 216.239.39.99

Mc

steveb




msg:166856
 5:03 am on Oct 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

Different update this time. Yahoo 569k.

216.239.57.98
216.239.57.99
216.239.57.105

(still the same useless idiotlinks, so nothing to see)

McMohan




msg:166857
 5:14 am on Oct 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

Right Steve. The meaningless backlinks this time around are not the same as we saw in the earlier update that was rolled back.

Mc

Powdork




msg:166858
 6:15 am on Oct 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

I have a meaningless backlink that was only added on 10/22 showing up with the other fodder.

raptorix




msg:166859
 11:22 am on Oct 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

I see als BL updates on 216.239.57.98, but one of them removed my backling about 3 weeks ago.

I still don't see why they put up some meaningless backlinks (ie from forums with my website in my profile) and forget some important ones (i have a music site and am linked from about 20 artists on the largest Musicdb around)

Rugles




msg:166860
 12:21 pm on Oct 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

>>I'm seeing updated backlinks again.

Yes, I am seeing a very small change. But change none the less.

added: from IP 66.102.7.104

shaoye




msg:166861
 2:46 pm on Oct 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

i checked with one ip, a lot of backlinks added
but several minutes later check again, they are gone

raptorix




msg:166862
 2:48 pm on Oct 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

66.102.7.104 does not show updates here, but 216.239.57.105 still shows updated BL for me.

tomasz




msg:166863
 7:57 pm on Oct 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

So, we all agree the backlinks have been rolled back, but what I want to know, WHY?
Can anyone speculate on this subject?

steveb




msg:166864
 8:12 pm on Oct 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

Backlinks have been updated, not rolled back.

tomasz




msg:166865
 8:39 pm on Oct 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

no, do not think this true, my site showed over 2k links on main site for day or two around day this post started and now shows pre-update which is around 500 for me.
New links shows for me at 216.239.57.105 they definitely got rolled back

steveb




msg:166866
 8:45 pm on Oct 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

Not sure what you are looking at but Yahoo still 569k so there was no rollback on the four 216.239.57.* datacenters. The others still haven't been updated

GodLikeLotus




msg:166867
 8:52 pm on Oct 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

rollback or not, its still a very worthless function now from Google.

one site i run has over 150 (quality, topic-related) backlinks and it shows only 35 backlinks now. 10 of those show no description or anything and there are quite a few DMOZ clones but no sign of DMOZ itself or the google directory listing.

What's the point?

tomasz




msg:166868
 8:54 pm on Oct 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

Well, I do not know what to tell you
but my site was sitting still at 556 for few month then links got updated and showed almost 2000 including my newest additions and then after a day or two they got "rolled back" to 556 and showing my old links again. I don't know if it only happened to me or some else, but I can say that my links got rolled back. I can see those links at 216.239.57.105 including my newest also

webhound




msg:166869
 8:59 pm on Oct 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

Yup these "updates" with Google are all pretty much pointless these days. Who cares what the backlinks change to when the serps are so stale?

(no I am not bitter.)

:-)

WebFusion




msg:166870
 9:54 pm on Oct 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

I would be perfectly happy if google didn;t show any backlinks at all.

The only purpose they serve is to give your competition a clue as to where your links are coming from.

dodger




msg:166871
 9:59 pm on Oct 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

I've also got some great backlinks that never show on Google.

steve128




msg:166872
 10:05 pm on Oct 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

>>>Backlinks have been updated, not rolled back.<<

yes they have been updated, but they rolled back.

By definition "updated" War on words, they have rolled back.

steve128




msg:166873
 10:06 pm on Oct 28, 2004 (gmt 0)

>>Yup these "updates" with Google are all pretty much pointless these days.<<

Perfect analysis -;

This 104 message thread spans 4 pages: < < 104 ( 1 2 [3] 4 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved