Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
Forum Moderators: open
My website is PR6 and I have a reciprocal link from my front page.
There are no penalties or anything either site as far as I can tell.
Any ideas what the deal is? I'm trying to be patient but 4 months doesn't seem normal.
Personally I feel it is asinine to remove pages based on common terms used on the WEB, literally, since day one of its existence. Especially since it allows the end user to stop at one place and see relative links. But I guess that does cuts down on people finding what they want without going back to any given search engine.
I remember the thread about links.html pages. I assumed (perhaps wrongly) that it was nonsense. The idea of ignoring links simply because of the file name is absurd. However, being absurd is no longer a good reason to assume it is untrue.
or similar if so chances are it is filtered out.
I doubt very much that is true. It's a fallacy (one of many in fact) that remains a fallacy as it has never been proven. Fo every example in favor of this fallacy there are 10 to disprove it.
I have 7 catergorized link pages, links.htm, links2.htm etc and they are count in the backlinks of other sites.
As already mentioned, check on another SE to see if it's Google specific. If it's not it *might* be due to some trick used by the Webmaster. Check out the backlinks of others sites they link to.
Doesnt mean that it doesnt happen. It could be that Google just doesnt always catch it. Otherwise one could assume that nothing ever gets filtered or algo'd out because there are tons of exceptions to EVERY one of Google's rules.
If somebody makes a claim the onus is on them to prove it, not vice verca.
Some sites apparently get banned for using doorway pages, cloaking, link farms, cross-linking and other supposed black hat techniques, while others are blatant in their use of the same techniques and thrive.
<edited for clarity>
I would say that it is most likley due to the volume of links on the one page, there are LOTS. Google may view this page as a link farm. Or, the have a file telling Google not to spider it.
I have checked 10 other sites from the page at random and none showed up. Although a few other links.htm pages did show from other sites.
Either way, it looks like nobody on that page will get credit. I would email Google the URL and ask them. They are the *only* ones that can answer your question.
I remember some senior people talking about finding unusual names for their links pages. You know crazy names.
I dont think I am nuts. But then what nutter does. Gibber gibber cluck cluck......
there was a very long thread (not in supporters) where people were claiming penalties for "links.html" and "site-map.html" but it was never concluded.
I think you got to look at the thread in supporter's forum. There were 2 or 3 exceptions that we saw. But i think the original thread was started by DaveN. And soon after there were about 10 to 15 confirmations. We searched for links.htm in backlinks and could not find it. That does not mean links.htm are not passing PageRank. It was just that at that time Google was not showing links.htm and its variations in backlink searches. I know this because at that time I was also one of the person searching for backlinks which were links.htm . I tried Government sites and even their links.htm were not showing up as backlinks.
Now to come to the present issue, since we know google has done it previously, it cannot be ruled out that they might not be doing that currently. :)