tedster
msg:4120163 | 5:02 pm on Apr 22, 2010 (gmt 0) |
I feel for your situation - but I also expect this year to see even more changes at Google aimed at "artificial" link profiles.
|
BradleyT
msg:4120184 | 5:34 pm on Apr 22, 2010 (gmt 0) |
Were those 50 links what you would consider "low quality"?
|
seoN00B
msg:4120496 | 6:19 am on Apr 23, 2010 (gmt 0) |
@tedster - time to change tactics..
@Bradleyt - im very sensitive on the quality of links bro. It just google detects my 50 links that i built in 2 weeks. :(
|
michaelj72
msg:4120563 | 9:16 am on Apr 23, 2010 (gmt 0) |
i wondered whether it was the number of the links that did it, or perhaps the kind of links that you got - i would expect a search engine to be a bit 'suspicious' if say those were links all coming from pages or sites with high page rank, or if the links were easily identified as 'paid links'.
that number of links in a month i don't think would be a problem with a more established or authoritative website. but i could be wrong. all depends on the kind of links, i would think.
|
rocco
msg:4120574 | 9:41 am on Apr 23, 2010 (gmt 0) |
Google is quite good in spotting so-called paid links, also traded links.
On the other hand, I have a website getting dozens of links naturally everyday - never had a problem with it.
It is not the amount of links, it clearly is the quality of these links.
|
Whitey
msg:4121113 | 1:09 am on Apr 24, 2010 (gmt 0) |
I'm sure there are many eyes looking at rapid traffic increases and link building.
Google has surely been putting a lot of effort into better algorithmic detection and more efficiency in editorial reviews of sites. They will just try to keep getting better and better at it.
Focus on good content and a few links. Natural linking is rare in those quantities , even for big sites.
|
|
