homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.237.95.6
register, free tools, login, search, subscribe, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Pubcon Website
Visit PubCon.com
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: Robert Charlton & aakk9999 & brotherhood of lan & goodroi

Google SEO News and Discussion Forum

This 34 message thread spans 2 pages: 34 ( [1] 2 > >     
How Does Google Handle Links from Irrelevant Sites?
Are all Links the Same for Google?
jcmiras




msg:716405
 8:42 am on Jun 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

Does google consider a link from irrelevant site as a "vote" for your site such that it will help in boosting your PR? OR google just count that as Zero? OR google penalize you because it seems to be a spam? what do you think?

 

mosaic service




msg:716406
 9:58 am on Jun 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

Google considers relevant theme based links...

any non-relevant links wouldn't be considered ...

and too many links may just trigger google's scanner to take action against your website...

Marketing Guy




msg:716407
 10:14 am on Jun 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

Mosaic do you have any evidence to support that?

While I've seen some theory and minor evidence to support that Google gives more weight to "on theme" links (and it is indeed a theory I would subscribe to), I've seen nothing to suggest that they completely ignore irrelevant links.

In fact I would go as far as to say that I don't think Google (or any other SE) are competent enough in identifying themes, groups, associations, etc to put such a reliance on them - the industry is still in its infancy.

A link is a link - some *may* have more impact, some *may* have less impact, some *may* have no impact at all. That's about as certain as anyone can be about it just now IMO.

MG

jaffstar




msg:716408
 10:15 am on Jun 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

any non-relevant links wouldn't be considered ...

A couple here and there would be considered, it depends on how many you get.

aris1970




msg:716409
 4:33 pm on Jun 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

Google considers relevant theme based links...
any non-relevant links wouldn't be considered ...

Absolutely wrong statement!

I have reported in other posts that irrelevant links from authoritative sites DO COUNT a lot for Google.

I have a website that holds #1 position for 2,500,000 Google results and has just 3-4 low PR backlinks and ONE BACKLINK on a PR6 page of an authoritative, totally irrelevant site!

Please note that I do NOT suggest to get more than a single backlink from each irrelevant site. This would probably be an alert for Google.

steveb




msg:716410
 7:30 pm on Jun 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

Google counts all links. It doesn't weight a link from the Yahoo main page the same as it weights a link from this thread, but all links count one way or another.

ownerrim




msg:716411
 8:03 pm on Jun 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

Google considers relevant theme based links...
any non-relevant links wouldn't be considered ...

and too many links may just trigger google's scanner to take action against your website...

Absolutely incorrect and illogical. For most sites, the majority of links will have nothing to do with the theme of the site being linked to. Commercial sites may have a lot of backlinks coming from industry-specific sites. But, for the most part, how much natural linking is going to occur with a, for example, online pharmacy anyway?

The only thing that makes a link relevant or not is the anchor text.

BigDave




msg:716412
 8:15 pm on Jun 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

GoogleGuy himself said that he personally can see a lot of value to off-theme links.

The owner of a kayak school links to his auto mechanic because he has never gotten better service. To me, that is more of a vote than simply being listed in an "on-topic" auto mechanic directory.

For the PR calculation, I would have to say that it is my opinion that it makes no difference.

In other areas of the algo, it probably does make a difference. I'm certainly not going to turn down a link simply because it is from an off-topic site.

birdstuff




msg:716413
 8:28 pm on Jun 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

Google considers relevant theme based links...
any non-relevant links wouldn't be considered ...

You're joking, right?

soapystar




msg:716414
 8:54 pm on Jun 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

its all about relevancy...and the linking site gets its own relevancy mark...pretty easy to think relevant links will carry more weight...its not a case of ignoring offtopic links...theres no way to totally fine tune that..but if you work the other way round...its pretty straightforward for the type of modelling they do to spot relevant links and weight them heavier....

plus..IMHO...while you cannot determine marginally offtopic links....a large number of non-relevant links and poor linking structures between them (non-organic) may well see a negative impact on your site rather than just a neutral one...

decaff




msg:716415
 9:11 pm on Jun 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

As usual...the discussion degrades when it comes to links and Google..

Google considers all links

On-theme links bring 2 distinctive values:
--> stronger consideration when calulating value to the site being pointed to AND (maybe even more important)
--> Targeted relevant traffic from the on-theme link itself
which will tend to have a higher conversion rate...

An Authoritative inbound link from a off-theme or on-theme site carries its own unique valuation.

Off-theme links can add value in sheer numbers...but the traffic coming through these links tends to be low grade and doesn't offer conversion value like with an on-theme link relationship

soapystar




msg:716416
 9:36 pm on Jun 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

decaff...you need to get back on the caffeine....

personally i never feel the discussion has degraded till someone starts flinging mud.....

i wonder if you have thought about the difference between relevance and theme and ontopic....

eeek




msg:716417
 9:47 pm on Jun 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

any non-relevant links wouldn't be considered

Really? Google's software must be incredible to be able to do such heuristics. Imagine a computer being able to decide such relevance.

cbpayne




msg:716418
 9:54 pm on Jun 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

IMHO - ALL links count in the PR calculation (PR is just part of the ranking formula).

Links from on-theme/on-topic sites appear in many theories/patents/etc to be weighted more heavily (ie off-topic still count) in the 'relevance' part of the ranking formula (or something similar, but not PR). We just do not know if any or parts of the theories/patents have actually been implemented by Google.

soapystar




msg:716419
 10:05 pm on Jun 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

imho your shouldnt worry too much about the pr calculation....its the relevance calculation that matters.....

aris1970




msg:716420
 10:25 pm on Jun 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

its the relevance calculation that matters.....

This is what I also thought until one year ago. Now I have several real paradigms where backlinks from OFF-topic, high PR sites count significantly.

It all really depend on what we compare:

<high PR from off-topic site> VS. <low PR from on-topic site>: Winner = OFF-topic

<PRx from off-topic site> VS. <PRx (equal) from on-topic site>: Winner = ON-topic

A cool mix will bring you the best results for sure :)

[edited by: aris1970 at 10:31 pm (utc) on June 28, 2005]

Scoreboard




msg:716421
 10:30 pm on Jun 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

I'd worry more about your anchor text mix...

decaff




msg:716422
 10:38 pm on Jun 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

no mud intended..

It is inevitable that when links are discussed (inbound/outbound/relevant/on-topic/off-topic/authorative/organically acquired/purchased...etc) .. that the discussion tends to degrade because everyone has different experiences with how Google calculates all of this and how these caclulations ultimately affect one's site or sites..at any given time in the SERPs cycles..

So planning a link campaign at any level really has to originate from these simple points:
--> Google is a a link based search engine content aggregator
--> Google will find pages via established (aged) and newly acquired (fresh) link relationships...
--> Google will see all the link relationships (that aren't intentially hidden or buried for whatever reason)
--> Google will then calculate, in the background, per each page crawled, the value of each link based on it's rating systems (authorative vs. relevant vs. on-topic vs. off-topic...etc..etc..) and then these calculations eventually find their respective place in the value of a page and it will find its place in the SERPs
--> The value of the link relationship itself should be the first consideration before the site owner starts to think about ranking and PR...

steveb




msg:716423
 11:01 pm on Jun 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

"that the discussion tends to degrade because everyone has different experiences with how Google calculates all of this"

Peculiar definition of "degrades".

webweasel




msg:716424
 2:18 am on Jun 30, 2005 (gmt 0)

The G-- Cached Snapshot of a page found in the web results will from time to time show that a search term used in the search was not found on the returned page and only found on pages linking to that page.

Relevant search terms on linked pages improve search results.

Links from most sites improve your PR. They can never hurt. Otherwise site could be attacked in this way. However it could draw you unwanted attention if it was deemed that the link came from a bad neighborhood.

High PR is one leg, relevant links is the second leg and the tripod is completed with good on-site.

ownerrim




msg:716425
 3:28 am on Jun 30, 2005 (gmt 0)

"High PR is one leg, relevant links is the second leg and the tripod is completed with good on-site."

Logical

PatrickDeese




msg:716426
 3:50 am on Jun 30, 2005 (gmt 0)

Paraphrasing a conversation I overheard at pubcon:

Cars > Car Seats > Leather > Cows > Milk

You don't have to take too many steps before relevancy is diluted.

I think ideally, you would want to get links from sites that link to your topic in some way - but it is unlikely that Google has yet mastered the ability to determine where to draw the line.

I wouldn't have any problem thinking that a site links from "on theme" pages gets brownie points, but I doubt that "off theme" page links are discounted. Too much human judgement is necessary at this point.

jcmiras




msg:716427
 5:03 am on Jun 30, 2005 (gmt 0)

"any non-relevant links wouldn't be considered"

""Really? Google's software must be incredible to be able to do such heuristics. Imagine a computer being able to decide such relevance. ""

I think Google has. Maybe its the same software or algo that they are using for Adsense.

joeduck




msg:716428
 5:44 am on Jun 30, 2005 (gmt 0)

and too many links may just trigger google's scanner to take action against your website...

Trigger the algo, I now think yes. One of my sites Gtraffic collapsed last month when a friend and I traded reciprocal links on 16k pages. I had him remove the links but not sure if I'll also need to plead with Google to remove a penalty.

soapystar




msg:716429
 8:14 am on Jun 30, 2005 (gmt 0)

joeduck..not sure that crosslining 16k pages is much to do with the links and structures people have been talking about...

econman




msg:716430
 2:03 pm on Jun 30, 2005 (gmt 0)

16,000 cross links can hardly look "natural" to Google, regardless of whether or not they are "on topic."

SlyOldDog




msg:716431
 3:01 pm on Jun 30, 2005 (gmt 0)

what about if I have one 16000 page site in English and one 16000 page site in italian? I put a British flag on every page of the Italian site and link to the English site.

And vice Versa

What is wrong with that?

joeduck




msg:716432
 4:33 pm on Jun 30, 2005 (gmt 0)

RE: 16k links
What is wrong with that?

I'd sure like to see basic link guidelines from Google on this. At the conference Google said to use "user experience" as the guideline, and as Sly notes there are many instances where 2 large sites would crosslink naturally - in fact in the early days this was standard practice to make sure people noted your friend's website.

That said I would NOT have done this if I had all the info I have now about how Google seems to frown on this type of linking.

Joe

sooperfly




msg:716433
 12:06 am on Jul 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

I havent seen any noticable added benefit from theme/relevance/whateveruwannacallit yet. At least not when you compare it to PR, volume, one way or not, ip and anchor text variance. Those are things we can all agree on I think...so if you can get on topic links then great for the future bc I think it would be their inclination to that way, but Google has shown nothing significant to me for on topic links.

webweasel




msg:716434
 1:29 am on Jul 1, 2005 (gmt 0)

The G-- Cached Snapshot of a page found in web results will from time to time show that a search term used in the search was not found on the returned page and only found on pages linking to that page.

This is pretty clear G-- views relevant links through the search terms as provided by inbound links. Although it might not improve PR it can improve search results placement.

This 34 message thread spans 2 pages: 34 ( [1] 2 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google SEO News and Discussion
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved