Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 18.104.22.168
Forum Moderators: open
Are any of you guys removing your links pages? I've read in some forums that many people have removed them, since Google will probably abandon that anyway, if it's not done already.
When you think about it, the whole thing didn't make that much sense anyway.
Google will rank a site higher if its content is relevant to another site and it links to it- Now THAT makes a whole lot of sense. Personally, I think that the old "I will link to you if you link to me" game is pretty much all over...
Your toughts anybody?
I responded to the point that 1 of 1000 web publishers dont even know about the Florida update. This I find hard to believe. In several industries with a lot of non-pros, they do know that things are different with Google. They dont know why, but hear things about filters and links, so many are dropping links or asking for AT to be changed.
Keep in mind, too, that many (most?) sites aren't in the business of selling widgets or services via the Web. They don't track their positions for specific keywords or keyphrases as compulsively as owners of affiliate or sites do. (Somehow I can't see a professor of colonial American history monitoring Google to see if he's in the #1 or #2 position for "Paul Revere academic papers" on any given day.) I don't know what percentage of the Web is devoted to e-commerce, but I suspect it's much smaller than the percentage of Webmaster World members who earn a livelihood from the Web.
I dropped links that were irrelevant to my site. Kept the ones that were. Think themes.
I think this nails it. I'm more inclined to participate in link exchanges post florida - as long as they are clearly and directly related to my site.
Post florida and on -IN, I am coming up as a top 5 result for a 2M plus search results term, based solely on the anchor text of my outbound links. Sadly those particular terms don't help me, as I am not directly in that business.
Who knows if this knob will be readjusted - but all signs at the moment indicate that both relevant outgoing and incoming links are critical.
My personal theory is that Google is emphasizing anchor text of outbound links with the express purpose of encouraging sites to link only to sites that are relevant to themselves, as not to incent the purchase of backlinks from unrelated sites - in other words, there is no way to stop the purchase of backlinks / pr, but Google can at least ensure that they are relevant.
I have been working on links for eight months and they just now showed up. We are talking about a lot of links. Some are not so relevant.
However, the top sites under my keywords have less links, same PR and their links are terrible. Guestbooks and whatnot. But they are ranking well and me ,well I cant even find my sites.
So either google is totally screwed up or playing favorites or have no friggin idea what they are doing.
Checks links pages have less than 100 links
Can be navigated to from home page
Have keyword, title and description tags
More than 1k less than 100k in size.
Link and home page remain live, and link remainss in place
I manually check link pages have at least google pr3(can't work out an automated way fo doing that) And steer clear of link farm like structures.
I create a new page for each link category, which bulks up the site size immensly. Each of my linsk pages has relevant meta tags and titles.
In most cases, I ONLY do recip links.
Sites are top 10 ranked in competitive criteria.