Some more internal links...

Why is my competitor better? :-)

[RFish]

Issuing a link:www.xxx.com search, I get back a long list, most of it of internal links within the site, from pages that do not necessarily include more internal links than others.

Does mailto: count?

And does the whole thing count when actually counting links for search positioning?

My main competition, whom accroding to alexa has almost twice as much links, when looking at the links in google, actually has much more links, but internal.

Very weird!

Any thought?

[WebGuerrilla]

Google does not show all backlinks and they also tend to show internal links first. To get a better picture of the linking structure of a site, try typing the url into the search box at

[alltheweb.com...]

[garylo]

link:www.xxx.com does not show the actual number of back links, only links from PR4 pages and up.

[mrguy]

All the web does not show all the links to a site either.

[garylo]

Anyway, AllTheWeb is more accurate than Google in showing Back links

[nell]

We had a dog site with little traffic, a couple of external links and low in the rankings. We did NO MORE than add a popular product to the site that increased the traffic. Within 2 months site began to rise in rankings. It is now #1 in the same keywords that were before buried. It has been #1 in those keywords for the last 8 months without exception.

The obvious question to follow:
Does Google consider site traffic in the ranking process? It seemed to in the case described above. In my thinking, it's more important than any links to or from a site. Links that can be bought, sold and traded. The traffic to a site is the final measure of how authoratative it is in any given category. PR and link structure is but a means to that end.

[jrobbio]

nell I agree with you from what I have observed. There has been a lot of variables in what I have been doing with my new site so nothing can be left without exception. But, I happened to write a comment about widget widgety widget and for many reasons people are searching for this term and no-one else has really written about it (or I've beaten them to it with freshbot). However, for the rest of the site I have not changed some things for quite a while yet they seem to be jumping up the rankings like there is no tomorrow. So anyway, it could be that this has nothing to do with popularity (since its very new and Google hasn't settled with it yet) or everything to do with popularity.

[mrguy]

If all the web is more accurate, why does Google show 289 backlings on my site, while all the web only shows 193?

[skipfactor]

We did NO MORE than add a popular product to the site that increased the traffic

Nell, did you check for new backlinks? Maybe folks linked to you after you added the popular product?

[Unversed]

While its probably true that sites with more trafic are, in general, more authorative, I'm not clear how Google could use this in its algorithm. If Google's information comes from spidering pages, how can it know how many hits those pages are getting?

[jrobbio]

I thought it may be from registering the clickthroughs that people make from searching google. Wouldn't that make sense?

[vitaplease]

If all the web is more accurate, why does Google show 289 backlings on my site, while all the web only shows 193?

Alltheweb is not more accurate it is different:

Alltheweb since recently only shows site external backlinks.
However Alltheweb also shows backlinks to internal pages.

Google only shows backlinks of approx PR4 or more (including site internal links)
Google shows a number of backlinks that is double the count that you can actually check as backlinks.

And finally Google's and Allthewebs index are not equal.