homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Platinum Sponsor 2014
Visit PubCon.com
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
Forum Library, Charter, Moderator: open

Google News Archive Forum

New Links Created, Submissions & Indexed

 10:22 pm on Nov 19, 2002 (gmt 0)

If we have 18 new web sites that we submitted & indexed in last months Google index but only came out with a 2/10 PageRank for web site and with no backward links showing. Can we expect the next index at the end of this month will show the backwards links and an increase in the PageRank of each web site since they are interlinked?



 10:56 pm on Nov 19, 2002 (gmt 0)

Not really. There is a threshold for backlinks. Some say pr5, some 4, some 3...etc. The moral is, that all backlinks don't show.


 11:47 pm on Nov 19, 2002 (gmt 0)

I don't understand. They all are interlinked to each other so, shouldn't the sites show about twenty-five links each since there are a twenty-five web site that link to one another?


 6:46 am on Nov 20, 2002 (gmt 0)

Wouldn't Google find it a bit suspicious if 18 brand new sites all just happen to link to each other? I do ;)


 8:03 am on Nov 20, 2002 (gmt 0)

jb123, what Brett was trying to explain is that Google doesn't display backlinks in their search unless they reach a minimum threshold of PR.

Most have observed that links below PR4 do not get displayed, but they're still indexed and count towards your PR total.

A much bigger issue is the incredible danger you're flirting with by cross-linking all of your sites without having any other relevant inbound links.

Google has been known to hand out stiff penalties for these schemes which are designed to artificially inflate PageRank.

See Crosslinking, Interlinking and Reciprocal Linking [webmasterworld.com] for more details.


 6:06 pm on Nov 20, 2002 (gmt 0)

I'm sorry, I most have not stated that right. We are in charge of marketing an association. The association currenty has over twenty web sites. We have created an association directory and within this directory all the web sites link to each other. Why or why not would this be a good thing. They are all related in subject manner.


 10:54 pm on Nov 20, 2002 (gmt 0)

It sounds like a legitimate call for interlinking the sites, but there are still reasons to be educated about the risks involved with extensive cross linking strategies.

You'll want to read up on things by visiting the Reciprocal Linkage Forum and their Library for more info.

I'm not 100% sure I understand exactly what you're describing, but if you're saying that you've created a directory of links to all of the sites and posted this identical directory on every one of them, you may raise a few flags with the spam filters for 3 reasons...

1) This very closely resembles the way link farms work. While your use is quite legitimate, link farms are groups of web sites that all agree to host an identical page of links to all other sites in the group. There have been heavy penalties when this has been done on a large scale.

2) Duplicate content. If your directory is identical on each site that hosts it, you may trip the duplicate content filters.

3) If the network of sites doesn't have inbound links from sites outside of the network you may trip filters for having a "closed loop" of sites that are artificially inflating PageRank by cross linking.

1 and 3 can be remedied by simply being aggressive in your link building strategy so that the number of relevant links from outside your network is greater than the number of "incestuous" links within the network.

2 can be avoided by simply doing some customizing of the directory as it appears on each of the sites, or you could host the directory on a separate domain that is linked to by the other sites. This would create a "hub" from which all of the other sites radiate.

On a very small scale, the above may not be something you need to worry about, and if your site was hand checked by an editor it sounds like it would be fairly clear that the network is quite legit.

I just believe that being aware of the relevant issues is always of value, and allows us to make informed decisions.


 11:58 pm on Nov 20, 2002 (gmt 0)

Ok! I'm freaking out now. Let me see if I can better explain myself so, you can tell me if this is bad or not. I have been put in charge of a new association. This association has approximately twenty plus, related web site members. Each web site is owned by different people, the web sites are of different theme/content and they are hosted at different places. We have a page on each site that is named the association directory. This page shows and provides links to all the members web site. Is this bad? It certainly wasn't intended to be bad. It was setup with the idea that we can give all the members more exposure by showing the directory on each site. What are your suggestions?


 12:20 am on Nov 21, 2002 (gmt 0)

First... don't freak out. My post wasn't intended to cause panic, just educate.

the web sites are of different theme/content

Was this association created for the purpose of increasing search engine results... or is there a unifying principle beyond SE promotion. Is it just a referral network, or is there a common thread between the members and their site themes?

How long have the websites in the network been around and do they each have unique inbound links from sites outside the network? DMOZ? Yahoo?

Is the directory page the only place where all the sites are inter-linked or is there extensive cross-linking beyond the directory page?


 12:42 am on Nov 21, 2002 (gmt 0)

The association was created for this particular industry so, the following things could be offered to its members. The association offers many things: web site development, seo help, merchant services, online help, email marketing, industry database link, affiliate program, listing in our directory and so on.

The directory page is the only place were all the sites are interlinked. Each site though has one link from their homepages back to one web site. This lucky one web site is the winner of the association's 2002 Best Web site Award so, all the sites give it that recognition. This will change yearly.

No links to Yahoo yet except for the one site because this association just started and we have determined if we are going to ask the members to pay for Yahoo's fee yet in light of what has just happened. DMOZ will not let us in because they say we are affiliate sites since we use an industry products database.

What do you think?


 1:27 am on Nov 21, 2002 (gmt 0)

One crucial question you didn't answer is this...

How long have the websites in the network been around and do they each have unique inbound links from sites outside the network?

Many of the sites that have been penalized for extensive cross-linking were nailed because they were a "closed loop". Meaning they had no links from sites outside of their network.

Many believe that this is a determining factor in whether the spam filters go off.

There are plenty of site networks that cross link very heavily without penalization, but they also have tons of inbound links from other sites.

A lot of the networks that were penalized cross-linked much more heavily than what you're describing. Many had links on every page to the home pages of all the sites.

The other issue is the exact duplicate content and links posted across a network of domains.

Personally, I would have each of the sites link to a single members directory hosted on the association website. This would still serve the members and avoid any risk of penalization for either cross linking or duplicate content.

My personal opinion is far from definitive though... I welcome differing and supportive viewpoints from anyone else that has experience with these issues.


 1:41 am on Nov 21, 2002 (gmt 0)

No, this association was just created. So, there are no other links. Of cource, it will be one of the things the members will need to try and do or pay us to get them for them. Will a link from business.com, www.joeant.com, etc. help?

Your thoughts are greatly appreciated!

Question: If we take down the page from every site that shows the directory, which is a listing of all the member's sites and then do what you suggested <<each of the sites link to a single members directory hosted on the association website. This would still serve the members and avoid any risk of penalization for either cross linking or duplicate content. >> . How would this benefit all the members' sites?


 1:48 am on Nov 21, 2002 (gmt 0)

No, this association was just created. So, there are no other links.

I'm not asking about the association, but the members themselves. Are you saying that every site in the association is brand new as well?


 2:34 am on Nov 21, 2002 (gmt 0)

Yes, the association is brand new and all new current members web sites are new, too.


 4:25 am on Nov 21, 2002 (gmt 0)

Then personally, I wouldn't even consider hosting an identical links page on all those domains.

Read up in the Reciprocal Linkage Forum's library and focus on getting quality inbound links to all those sites from places other than your own network.


 6:02 am on Nov 21, 2002 (gmt 0)

If it smells like spam...


 11:27 pm on Nov 21, 2002 (gmt 0)

Sorry, to be a bother but I really appreciate your opinion. What if we in place of the exact directory page of every site, we put two or three links on every web site homepage and make sure there different on each site. Would this work or will still bring up read flags. Would this still creat a pocket even though a few sites have additional linkes besides the other web site in the association. Thank you in advance for your response.


 12:21 am on Nov 22, 2002 (gmt 0)

Having just two or three links that are different from site to site will certainly be less risky, but you are agonizing over the wrong thing.

Focus on getting quality inbound links from outside your network.

Otherwise, you're just trying to pull your way up to the top by your bootstraps.


 12:38 am on Nov 22, 2002 (gmt 0)

I difinately can understand the reasoning in getting other links but why wouldn't links from all of these web sites be good links. All of these sites are RELATED subject matter which means they are related links to each other, correct? They are not owned by the same company and they are hosted on diiferent servers with different IP addresses & different Class C's. So, why wouldn't these be good links to each other? If all else fails, why don't we eliminate the directory (network or association) but link them all together from the homepages by two's or three's so, they all get a boost for relative links but don't have any directory link page on each site? Would other good links include: Yahoo if you want to $300 each , DMOZ, Joeant.com, goguides.com, zeal.com, alltheweb.com, inktomi, etc.


 1:10 am on Nov 22, 2002 (gmt 0)

It sure smells and appears like an association formed (apparenly by an SEO) to help boost all 20 web sites ... perfect reasons for banning the closed loop network ..!.

Each web site will be better off seeking independent inbound links and not be associated with this cross linking association IMHO.


 1:38 am on Nov 22, 2002 (gmt 0)

"I difinately can understand the reasoning in getting other links but why wouldn't links from all of these web sites be good links."

Five guys in high school say they are cool. They call each other cool. But not a soul in the rest of the school says they are cool. Should the five guys be considered cool by a search engine?

The five may not be "spamming cool", but their opinions shouldn't help their cool rank a bit. get outside links.

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