Forum Moderators: open
I have read, re-read, digested and disseminated every article I can find on text links/cross linking in the Webmaster World, Google forum and there appears to be no definitve answer to what is and what isn`t correct.
I have therefore submited a few examples below, which hopefully people "IN THE KNOW" will reply to with constructive answers, to assist not only myself but the large number of new people joining this forum.
I may have missed or incorrectly detailed some information so please forgive any errors.
A web design company runs say 150 web sites.
They have portfolio pages called say "portfolio1.htm" "portfolio2.htm" "portfolio3.htm"
On these pages are a list of 50 of their clients with text links to them configured as follows:
+++++++++
Example 1.
A & B C Manufacturers
<a href="http://www.widget-manufacturuers.?" target="_blank">Widget Manufacturers
</a>
In turn EACH PAGE of the http://www.widget-manufacturers.? web site has a link to the web design company as follows.
<a href="Z-XW-web-design.?" target="_blank">Web Site designers</a> Z & XW Web Design
The sites are hosted on the SAME IP address.
Is this considered cross linking and would it lead to a site being manually banned?
+++++++++
Example 2.
A & B C Manufacturers
<a href="http://www.widget-manufacturuers.?" target="_blank">Widget Manufacturers
</a>
In turn a LINKS PAGE on the http://www.widget-manufacturers.? web site has a link to the web design company as follows.
<a href="Z-XW-web-design.?" target="_blank">Web Site designers</a> Z & XW Web Design
The sites are hosted on the SAME IP address.
Is this considered cross linking and would it lead to a site being manually banned?
+++++++++
Example 3.
A & B C Manufacturers
<a href="http://www.widget-manufacturers.?" target="_blank">Widget Manufacturers
</a>
In turn EACH PAGE of the http://www.widget-manufacturers.? web site has a link to the web design company as follows.
<a href="Z-XW-web-design.?" target="_blank">Web Site designers</a> Z & XW Web Design
The sites are hosted on DIFFERENT IP Addresses
Is this considered cross linking and would it lead to a site being manually banned?
+++++++++
Example 4.
A & B C Manufacturers
<a href="http://www.widget-manufacturers.?" target="_blank">Widget Manufacturers
</a>
In turn a LINKS PAGE on the http://www.widget-manufacturers.? web site has a link to the web design company as follows.
<a href="Z-XW-web-design.?" target="_blank">Web Site designers</a> Z & XW Web Design
The sites are hosted on DIFFERENT IP Addresses
Is this considered cross linking and would it lead to a site being manually banned?
+++++++++
Example 5.
Two or three of the client sites supply similar "In Context" information and services.
There is no duplicate content (or near Dup content) and they link to each other from their links page (Using the same coding as Example 1) as well as both linking to the web design company from their links page.
The sites are hosted on the SAME IP address.
Is this considered cross linking and would it lead to a site being manually banned?
+++++++++
Example 6.
Two or three of the client sites supply similar "In Context" information and services.
There is no duplicate content (or near Dup content) and they link to each other from their links page (Using the same coding as Example 1) as well as both linking to the web design company from their links page.
The sites are hosted on DIFFERENT IP addresses.
Is this considered cross linking and would it lead to a site being manually banned?
+++++++++
Example 7.
A number of sites each with specific services/products (which may or may not link to each other as per Example 6.) have a common interest - say "Sale of Large Green Widgets" and they link to say "A Large Green Widget Shop" on each page.
The "Large Green Widget Shop" does NOT link to them.
The Links are NOT affiliate links but TEXT links.
The sites are hosted on the SAME IP addresses.
Is this considered cross linking and would it lead to a site being manually banned?
+++++++++
Example 8.
A number of sites each with specific services/products (which may or may not link to each other as per Example 6.) have a common interest - say "Sale of Large Green Widgets" and they link to say "A Large Green Widget Shop" on each page.
The "Large Green Widget Shop" does NOT link to them.
The Links are NOT affiliate links but GRAPHIC links.
The sites are hosted on the SAME IP addresses.
Is this considered cross linking and would it lead to a site being manually banned?
+++++++++
In conclusion
It appears that the futher down the examples you go it looks a little like the links are beggining going round in circles which is not meant to be the case.
It would also appear from the postings in Webmaster World that this could flag Google for cross linking.
IMHO I imagine that this area needs to given consideable thought and planning before advising any client about "In Context" linking between sites.
Feedback regarding the 8 Examples (and any more that people would like to list) would I hope assist us all in understanding this complex subject and supply (hopefully in lamens terms) an "Idiots Guide" to cross linking.
Regards
EW
A web designer linking to their client sites via a portfolio is reasonable, and client sites saying who designed their web site for them is also reasonable.
I hope that helps and I'm sure others will pile in with more comments.
Have all the "experts and professionals" or people with "Knowledge" in WW gone on holiday or were my examples to complex, simple, already dealt with in another thread, or just plain boring?
:-(
EW
Have all the "experts and professionals" or people with "Knowledge" in WW gone on holiday or were my examples to complex, simple, already dealt with in another thread, or just plain boring?
:-(
The post it too long to read and understand for me :(
Okay, here goes:
1. Don't do it! (safe and sound bet). Recommended for 99% of all webmasters/seo's.
2. It can be done if you know how. If you want someone "in-the-know" to explain how to do it.....dream on! (not being unkind or harsh, but you are asking for a million dollar gift, and you may be a competitor).
3. Buy 100 domain names, cross-link them for an experiment. Be prepared to dump them! If you get burned, which is fairly likely within 6 months, you just learned how not to do it.
4. Buy another 100 domain names and try again. This time work out how Google spotted they were cross-linked the previous time (you can avoid step 3 if you give this some thought first, been there done that!).
5. Repeat steps 3 & 4 until:
6. If these domain survive for 6 months you may have gotten away with cross-linking. Of course Google gets smarter all the time and they may still hunt you down in the future.... that's the chance you take.
Cross-linking pays off big time. I don't think you're about to get anyone to give away the secret to the magic source. Experiment, in time you will discover it, but always be aware of those Google folks gunning for your butt! It is a dangerous path to take unless you can sustain the high stakes played at the cross-linking table.
While playing this "game" I suggest you also go for Brett's 12 month's to success, and starec's "Getting Robust": [webmasterworld.com...]
Cheating can pay off and make you huge amounts of money, it can also see you hurt very badly, playing the percentages is a wiser course of action:)
Getting a PR of 5 is not a hard thing to do. So the true benefits of mass cross-linking, in my opinion, is being able to create your own anchor text directed towards multiple keywords and phrases.
(It's 4am and i'm probably too tired to be answering anything, but i'll try anyway.)
What you just described sounds like standard link pages. It doesn't sound like agressive cross-linking which is what Google would generally ban a site for.
The practical problem with this idea is that it is all kinds of unlikely that someone would buy 100 domains and crosslink them, or even a few dozen domains, unless they were trying to do well for some very competitive commercial SERPs. And, if the do manage to do well for such SERPs, it is near guaranteed that your competitors will report you. Getting away with this would require dumb competitors.
Cross-link and everyone is out to get you, at least once they have spotted you. Doesn't necessarily mean you will get killed though! Google is slow to catch on, and the months they need to combat you can make it all worthwhile. In some cats you will not get reported at all! I've cross linked over 300 domains in a cat for over 2 years, Google is still oblivious or takes the stance that they don't care.
If you do it, and get caught, live with it! If you can't live with it, don't do it.
By the very fact Google now controls so much of the marketplace it has made itself a target to be highly manipulated. If it had 2% market share I wouldn't waste a second on it, but 35% to 70% market share (including partners) makes it a target worth battling with, and inversely people who manipulate it a target they want to be rid of:)
I am neither condoning cross linking nor do I practice it (intentionally) nor will I ever use it, IF I UNDERSTAND exactly what it is I am trying to avoid.
IMHO It SHOULD BE BANNED
I am merely trying to establish EXACTLY what is and isn't correct or incorrect cross linking and text links based on the examples shown.
This answer has me slightly baffled:
"It can be done if you know how. If you want someone "in-the-know" to explain how to do it.....dream on! (not being unkind or harsh, but you are asking for a million dollar gift, and you may be a competitor)."
I understand this Forum to propose assistance and the sharing of information between Webmasters for the good of Webmasters and its members, thereby creating a better understanding of Search Engines and associated services and ultimately better and "In context" search results for everyone.
Perhaps everyone should read Webmaster World Mission Statement posted by Brett
"Mission:
We are here for members to discuss the process of doing business. There are enough (too many) b2b and b2c sites out there. Running a website these days takes a great deal of knowledge. The design, coding, maintenance, promotion, marketing, and management of a website is almost an impossible task for one person alone without extensive training. We are here as a forum for the members to share and gain knowledge in operating and promoting a website. Think of us as part of your extended site development and process team. We are not here to actually do business with one another."
[webmasterworld.com...]
Therefore it follows that if Forum members do not wish to share information with others IMHO they should not comment on the posts they wish not to disclose information.
It then follows that only "In context" postings that HELP members should be posted in replies.
As for the phrase "Cheating" this is something I have never been guilty of in my 40 years in business - NEVER "assume" this, as has been intimated in one posting.
To get back to the subject matter, if webmasters know the correct answer to the examples given, they can avoid use of these underhand methods thereby supplying their clients with a better and more professional service.
We all have competitors. GOOD competition is vital in all businesses to control complacency and monopolies taking over, just as Google has good competition with AV and AllTheweb.
If I knew the answer to my Examples and saw a posting in the forum regarding this matter I would not hesitate to supply my findings in a posting (providing I was sure, to the best of my ability, that my findings were correct at the time of posting.)
When and if I try a test case, as suggested, I would not hesitate to post the results here for all to see.
It seems to me that some replies to exacting questions in this forum are inadequate and "Out of Context" - which leads me to believe that perhaps the advice given by many members cannot be relied upon in any way.
What therefore is the point of discussing a topic, when the information given cannot be relied upon and is filled with guesses, thoughts and inadequate information relating to the chosen subject.
Perhaps Webmaster World should set up a paid membership only service and charge a very high fee for it
That way only those webmasters who REALLY KNOW what they are doing and would pay the high fee, could share in, and reap the benefit of, expert advice.
I for one would welcome it.
The World is not perfect place and the Internet is no exception.
Those responsible enough, such as some of the Webmaster members in this forum CAN help Search Engines and Web Sites become a far simpler and safer place for those professional companies who wish to provide clients, and ultimately their customers with a quality solution to their products and search requirements.
To those who try to cheat, buck the system and supply inadequate and out of context results from search listings out of greed or just plain bl**dy mindedness, laws should be bought in to deal with them in a correct and timely manner.
I did read somewhere recently that Spam E-mail was to be bought under the Courts jurisdiction in the USA.
It is time that blatant cheats in the Web Design World are treated in the same manner.
EW
As previously stated don't cross-link at all and you can't go wrong, at least for a cross-linking penalty. Simple as that!
"Idiots Guide" to cross linking
percentages is wise.
A bit like asking NASA for an "Idiots Guide" to operating the space shuttle.
There are too many variables to consider as it's not any one thing that will trip a spam filter.
If you are intent in pursuing this direction EarWig the best course to take is read all the mistakes others have made.
The best advise I can give > even too much "life-giving" water is poison to us therefore with crosslinking less is more.
If you want someone "in-the-know" to explain how to do it.....dream on! (not being unkind or harsh, but you are asking for a million dollar gift, and you may be a competitor).
Percentages you never know! Some of our senior members are very generous :)
<added> Nice advise fathom.To new members i would always recommend to pay Special attention to his advice.
I have even send many spam reports.
From what I am reading (and from the posting by fathom - love the analogy of NASA BTW), it appears you may be a little wiser than some of the postee's in the WW forum and I therefore thank you for responding.
I am, as we oldies say, inwardly digesting the information, and will certainly take into account your words.
Perhaps I may be making an error in my posting so I would like to put it in simpler terms.
In "your opinion" can I "safely" (I seem to have to use the word carefully) text link to all my client sites from a portfolio page on my web design web site using "widget manufacturers" as the anchor text and can I then "safely" link from their pages to me using "web site designers" as the anchor text.
I promise I won`t hold you to it - all I am trying to do is not make too many mistakes - just a simple something like, IMHO I believe this would not vitiate any current rules of Google and possibly other search engines, would suffice. That would give me the confidence to proceed as at this precise moment in time I am not sure which way to turn.
(sticky if I have asked someting I should not and I will withdraw the request):-)
Whether it is 2% or 92% should not matter to anyone - if it applies to a search engine with 2% it will almost certainly apply to a 92% in time and vice-versa.
Netizen and John_Creed - thank you for the input
rfgdxm1 - An excllent response - thanks - and I understand exactly what you are saying.
I do not have any client's requirements for very competitive commercial SERPs (thank godness), so can concentrate on providing all of my smaller/mid sized company clients with in context results, which attract a large amount of traffic for their products and services.
Perhaps then, with hindsight, I should not have needed to make this posting at all. After all the only person that COULD possibly jeopardise a ban if I follow the above example is my web design company - not the client.
Thanks again guys and gals.
I look forward to any further "In Context" help coming on this thread, not only for my beneifit, but for all future newcomers to this Forum.
Regards
EW
I've had many sites heavily cross linked (including WebmasterWorld and searchengineworld) for years with nary a problem.
I think you have to ask yourself one question, is this going to help my visitors? If it is, then never fear doing it.
Yep, go for it and you can hold me accountable if you wish;) Personally I would vary the anchor text coming back to you from the client sites, but that is your choice, Google will not kill you either way, but might like you more if you vary the client anchor text;)
I do this all the time and have never suffered because of it:)
Maybe a number of us (apologies to those if it was only me) assumed you wanted to do something a little more adventurous....it appears you don't....so, got for it and have fun:)
%%%%
In "your opinion" can I "safely" (I seem to have to use the word carefully) text link to all my client sites from a portfolio page on my web design web site using "widget manufacturers" as the anchor text and can I then "safely" link from their pages to me using "web site designers" as the anchor text.
This kind of "spokes"-linking should be no problem, I'm quite sure. Even if all domains share the same IP. I do similar linking for a very long time.
It would be nice if each of the domains had other outbound and inbound links additionally.
Only if you cross-link all of the "widget manufactorers" sites among each other you may cause problems.
That cross-linking penalty exists...believe me! I think it wouldn't apply to less than a dozen domains, but a large number will get caught unless it is done carefully;)
BTW, I see you are not worried about the hidden text penalty (if such a thing exists either?)....just testing the plex out or know some insider info?
I've had many sites heavily cross linked (including WebmasterWorld and searchengineworld) for years with nary a problem.
I think WebmasterWorld and SearchEngineWorld are a bad example of heavy crosslinking. There may indeed be plenty of links "crosslinking" but there are many more pages not... mostly "one-way links".
>I think WebmasterWorld and SearchEngineWorld are a bad example of heavy crosslinking. There may indeed be plenty of links "crosslinking" but there are many more pages not... mostly "one-way links".
Yep, i agree with fathom that WebmasterWorld and SearchengineWorld aren't good examples here. To me a far better example for what is possible, is jim's (god bless 'em) jimworld. In the past - before the major redesigns - his sites were really heavy crosslinked. However, it made perfect sense for the users, so apparently no problem with se's / goodle.
I run <10 different sites related to one topic (dmoz level 2) all targeting different users / different worlds within this topic. I crosslink them whenever it makes sense - better than duplicating all stuff, imho! Until know no problem at all (since 4 years). Knock on wood.
All this great response and positive vibes too.
Thank you all very much - you have just made one webmaster a very happy guy.
:-)
I will now go away and (after a glass of ice cold champers) do what I have to do with more confidence. If I C**k anything up or meet any problems with listings you guys will all be the first to get some feedback to hopefully help you as well.
Thanks again
EW
