Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.204.165.156

Forum Moderators: martinibuster

Looking for links to build my customers directory

I have found several links already exist

   
1:03 am on Sep 20, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Working on building a links directory for my client. (be gentle, I am new). So the first thing I do is go to alltheweb and type in his link. Over 300 links exist. So weeding through them, I find these generic looking pages that have a pile of unrelated links on them.

#1. So, are these the famous link farms?

#2. His new site (he was banned - he got caught up in the "make a quick buck seos") is prestine and clean, absolutely. Terribly squeaky. Do I have to request that his link be removed from these pages? If I don't will he be in trouble with the google police? We certainly will not link back to those sites.

#3. The most important question of all, there are sites that are set up like search engines and I land on a page that has all of the www.samekeyword.com links like I requested that keyword in dmoz or something. Are these for real, do we link to these or leave them off?

Buffy

4:11 pm on Sep 23, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I'm not the best to answer this but will give your thread a boost!

Why does your client want to link back to all these people who have given him links?

You can not get in trouble for a site linking to you, however low down, spamming, scummy,link farm like they are! Otherwise if you had an annoying competitor, you could build a spammy website, get a PR0 and link to his site. DO NOT LINK TO THESE SITES.

8:55 pm on Sep 23, 2002 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator martinibuster is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



I myself shoot for quality over quantity as far as [b]outbound[/] links are concerned. And I'm also careful as to the quality of the inbound links.

SIDENOTE: Although others around here may discount the page theme, I believe that the surrounding text of the page on which your link exists can make a difference as to the relevance. And if not now, then maybe in the future. Of course, that's just my paranoia... I mean opinion.

What about other people around here?

7:20 am on Sep 24, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I have read numerous times that you won't be hurt by having bad incoming links, only by linking to bad sites. And according to many people in various forums Google won't count incoming links on pages below pagerank of 4 anyway.

You're right Martinibuster, go for quality links. When I decide to link to another site I check their pagerank and what type of incoming links they have. I would never link to a site that seems to be doing fishy stuff. Link to sites with quality incoming links that make sense for the content of that site itself. Keep your eyes open for large amounts of links coming from the same site. Sometimes the links are hidden and the site providing them has no similarity with the site it links to.

7:25 am on Sep 24, 2002 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator mack is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



If you suspect the inbound links are ffa or link farm orientated, just class that as no links and start fresh. try and build up a good number if indound links from sites on a similar theme and with a nice page rank. then you can start thinking about returning links (to the good links you find) linking to the old low, or no pagerank sites is sure to be very bad for your site.
9:53 am on Sep 24, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



And according to many people in various forums Google won't count incoming links on pages below pagerank of 4 anyway

This is a misunderstanding Susanne.

Google does indeed count incoming links from sites that have a PR lower than 4.

It just doesn't display them when using the link: command which displays a site's backward links.

11:24 am on Sep 24, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Sorry Dante I don't get it.

You say Google counts links from pages below 4 but doesn't display the links when I do link:www.site.com?

So the number I get when I use that command, say 400 links, includes the pages below 4 but if I start to check all the URLs I have been given in the search result I won't be able to find any page below 4?

One site I am working with has 394 links according to Google but 524 according to AllTheWeb. I thought AllTheWeb included all links and Google only those above PR 4.

Please elaborate!

2:10 pm on Sep 24, 2002 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Administrator martinibuster is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



ATW and Google spider different sites. I've received relevant responses from ATW that were found in guestbooks, whereas Google didn't.

While you can compare their algos and results, you must realize that they are not serving data from the same well of information.

2:22 pm on Sep 24, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



You say Google counts links from pages below 4 but doesn't display the links when I do link:www.site.com?

Exactly.

So the number I get when I use that command, say 400 links, includes the pages below 4 but if I start to check all the URLs I have been given in the search result I won't be able to find any page below 4?

Not necessarily.

While it is understood that links with a PR less than 4 are not displayed using the link: command, there is some conjecture about the fact that Google almost always quotes "about" twice as many links as they choose to display.

The links that aren't shown may or may not include other PR4 or better sites. (though I doubt it) Only Google knows for sure. :-)

If you do backlink searches for PR2 and 3 sites in Google you will often find no results at all, but it is "common knowledge" that Google won't even index a page if it doesn't have at least one inbound link from a site already in it's index.

On occasion you may find a few higher PR backward links that have given the PR2 or 3 site it's Page Rank through trickle down.

In other cases it will have achieved it's PR via many links of equal or lesser PR. In this case it will display no backward links via the link: command but you can find those links in the Google index by doing a search for "www.DomainInQuestion.com".

Please elaborate!

All of the threads below make at least some mention of what I am describing above.

[webmasterworld.com...]
[webmasterworld.com...]
[webmasterworld.com...]
[webmasterworld.com...]
[webmasterworld.com...]
[webmasterworld.com...]
[webmasterworld.com...]

7:43 am on Sep 25, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Great, thanks a lot guys! It is beginning to make sense. I searched for my URL in Google and got these interesting results:

link:www.mysite.com 394
www.mysite.com 1
"www.mysite.com" 290
"mysite.com" 338
mysite.com 1
mysite 356
"company name" 741

"Company name" shows that many people might have added our name to their sites but without a link. Or those sites are the ones that Google doesn't count for link popularity. Time to sit down and write to those who haven't linked to us! And to check the same thing in other engines too.

I always wondered why Google would give x number of links using the link: command but then only show half of them. But they need to keep some of their secrets to themselves I suppose!

10:14 am on Sep 25, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Great, thanks a lot guys! It is beginning to make sense. I searched for my URL in Google and got these interesting results:

link:www.mysite.com 394
www.mysite.com 1
"www.mysite.com" 290
"mysite.com" 338
mysite.com 1
mysite 356
"company name" 741

"Company name" shows that many people might have added our name to their sites but without a link. Or those sites are the ones that Google doesn't count for link popularity. Time to sit down and write to those who haven't linked to us! And to check the same thing in other engines too.

I always wondered why Google would give x number of links using the link: command but then only show half of them. But they need to keep some of their secrets to themselves I suppose!

2:10 pm on Sep 25, 2002 (gmt 0)



Time to sit down and write to those who haven't linked to us! - Susanne

Hello Susanne and Welcome again to Webmaster World. This is a great point youíve made in the quote above and I didnít want it to get lost so Iím pointing it out. I really love little gems like this. Run a search for the company name and then contact all who are referring to the company but without a link. Seems like an easier link to garner. I think Iíll add that one to my tip list, thanks.

7:56 am on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Thanks Paynt. I am very surprised 'cause I thought this was something everybody already knew (except little green newbie me!). At least I was able to give something back after having been given so much free and excellent information in Webmasterworld. Thanks also to Dante who encouraged me to get to the bottom with linkpop, which eventually presented this new idea. Cheers :)
8:21 am on Sep 26, 2002 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Happy to be of service Susanne.

<peeks over Paynt's shoulder at the tip list while discreetly snapping photos with his spy camera>

Speaking of which, I also highly recommend checking the Library [webmasterworld.com] for Paynt's priceless contributions to the world of link strategization.

 

Featured Threads

Hot Threads This Week

Hot Threads This Month