| 3:37 pm on Jun 15, 2012 (gmt 0)|
We can kick off the discussion by looking at this post from SERoundtable this week: Barry spotted some solid comments from Google's John Mueller in the Google Webmaster Forum.
|I realize encouraging users to make natural links & recommendations is not always easy, depending the market you're in, but those are really what our algorithms are looking for. On the other hand, links that are just bought, sold, traded, or even placed yourself, are not really the kind of recommendation that our algorithms would use when evaluating your site. |
| 8:00 pm on Jun 15, 2012 (gmt 0)|
Let's say Website A is being linked to several times from Website B and Website B has rotating banner ads on each of its pages. It could be a GIF animation.
The links to Website A are not coming from the rotating ads (they are coming from forums), but I am wondering how Google considers links coming from a site (Website B) that has rotating ads?
I should add that the same sites linked to in the rotating ads are linked to by regular text links at the bottom of all the pages on Website B.
I would appreciate your thoughts.
| 8:17 pm on Jun 15, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|or even placed yourself, are not really the kind of recommendation that our algorithms would use when evaluating your site |
I'd like to think that that statement isn't quite right. If a link to authority content is placed within a relevant article, by which I mean that the linked article would actually be potentially interesting to the reader, then IMO it should be seen as a good link irrespective of who placed it or what other links are in the vicinity.
| 8:31 pm on Jun 15, 2012 (gmt 0)|
This is really the 65,000 dollar question. Is Google going to tell us what they are looking for when they know that as soon as they do millions of webmasters will know how to game the system again? And if we all find out the secret they will just have to change the algo again so yesterday's successes become tomorrow's failures.
There is a lot to be said for ignoring popular wisdom and taking your own path. There is more than one way of skinning a cat.
| 7:02 am on Jun 16, 2012 (gmt 0)|
thanks tedster but I seen that barry post & all related post's too but what I want to know I still didn't find any where I think you got something else of my question.. well
@superclown2 i like your thought & but before going any further in seo we have to know what is exact right way for link building & we all know it's basic and major thing for any seo
| 7:42 am on Jun 16, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|what kind of links Google considering in Google penguin update as spam? |
As per experience of my projects where i receive unnatural links message in GWT:
These types of links are spam/unnatural for penguin:
1. Blogroll/Sidebar Links - through out site (as they seem to be paid)
2. Off theme links/ Non-niche and irrelevant sites
3. Direct links from Paid Link Networks
4. Hidden Links
5. Irrelevant anchor text
6. Existence of link exchange page
7. Too much comment links
8. Dofollow Affiliate links ..(Little Doubt)
@abhishekmishra - Hope this clear your query.
| 7:44 am on Jun 16, 2012 (gmt 0)|
| 7:56 am on Jun 16, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|@superclown2 i like your thought & but before going any further in seo we have to know what is exact right way for link building |
No. This is the trap that many would-be webmasters fall into. There are many far more important routes to success than simply learning how to get links.
However, to answer your question; it is not possible to give a formula for successful link building because Google keep changing the rules. Right now a natural-looking profile is flavour of the month which means as few links as are absolutely necessary, from top quality sites with a similar or complementary 'flavour', with a varied anchor text profile. Too many links look un-natural for a newish site, too many links with the same or similar anchor text raise a red flag. Unless you have a 'brand' site of course, in which case you can do pretty much whatever you want. What the situation will be next week/month/year is pure speculation but it is unlikely that Google will abandon their attempt to force down the use of links that we aquire ourselves, rather than those that are freely given by others.
| 2:47 am on Jun 17, 2012 (gmt 0)|
People still build links? The only real way to acquire 100% natural links is not to link build at all. Google has a bit of a conundrum on their hands where they want us to actively build a natural link graph, it's like having 100% natural food from a test-tube.
I suspect that Google expects us to do "some" link building but not much and that even that minimal amount of link building is held against you if you don't do it. Just how much link building is built into what Google would consider 100% natural?
| 8:42 am on Jun 17, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|Just how much link building is built into what Google would consider 100% natural? |
They ain't saying and the correct answer keeps changing. That's the sort of thing that makes this business so much fun <G>