Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 188.8.131.52
Forum Moderators: open
The range of ecommerce products may not be the same, let's say one particular domain may contain an array on information and products about shoes, another may contain information and products about snow board equipment. All the stores are owned by me, but does google look at all these sites hosted on the same ip number and penalize or frown on such a thing. I know this is very similiar to dynamic hosting when you have a hosting company that has a single ip and multiple sites are hosted on it. I do know that some hosting companies will give you dynamic ip's and there might be 500 websites hosted on that single ip number. If one of them spams google then google may ban the "ip" number and all 500 sites are penalized.
I'm not getting at that I intend to spam, further from the truth, I practice good business online, but I guess what started to make me question this issue was "I have never hosted all my sites" until now, so now it's an issue for me.
Any input is appreciated, thanks much.
I'm not sure how the SEs would view it if your sites were all chasing the same keywords. I don't think they look fondly on a single IP address monopolizing the SERPs.
Given this, given Google's repeated emphasis on NOT using "unnatural link schemes", given repeated sad stories in this forum from people who laboriously spread their affiliate program out over multiple hosts, only to have Google strip all but one of them out of its search results -- it is irrational to the point of psychosis to create strong interlinks between otherwise-hardly-linked sites, then speculate about what ELSE might get you in trouble.
On the other hand, 100,000 strongly interlocked pages on the SAME server will cause no problems -- if some of them have good incoming and outgoing links.
This points up a danger in "link exchange" schemes -- they amount to something like an inverted-Mr.-Rogers "come into my BAD neighborhood" invitation.
it's incestuous encapsulated linking
I would be interested in hearing more about this topic. Lets say that I create 3 large sites (200k pages each). One has widget reviews, one about how to pick a widget, and another with widget definitions. All 3 sites are very useable for a real person and display different data in different ways, but all on the same main topic. All 3 sites link to each other on the bottom of each page. Would this fall under incestuous encapsulated linking?
In my case I have created several websites for a number of complementary therapists. Now this is a category that covers aromatherapy, reflexology and all sorts of wierd as well as conventional stuff. I'm considering creating links between these clients. It would help visitors find other relevant websites, and I would hope it would boost SERPS.
Will Google think this is natural or unnatural?
If i have an online retails for computers. and want to create a 'shopping network' could this be done. Computers are not related to 'gift baskets' but if the link text focused on the 'online store' element of each site would it be related. i.e. link text =
online store for gift baskets
online store for Music/Cds
If you have a number of sites hostd on the same server on the same ip using the same concepts for every site and linking all of them, Result is penalty.
If you have a number of sites hostd on the same server but not on the same ip (different on D level only) using the same concepts for every site and linking all of them, Result is penalty.
If you have a number of sites hostd on the same server but different ip (different on C level) using the same concepts for every site and linking all of them, Result may be penalty.
If you have a number of sites hostd on the same server but different ip (different on C level) using the same concepts with different content for every site and linking all of them, Not penalty.
If you have a number of sites hosted on 2 different server using the same concepts for every site and linking all of them (sites on different server only)... No Penalty.
If you have a number of sites hostd on the different server using the same concepts for every site and linking all of them, No Penalty.
Google can still detect almost all your scenarios regardless of IP except for the last 2 paragraphs.
I dont' think Google keep records of who owns, the contact, and IP of a particular domain. If they do, that would be very inefficient.
All they have to do really is query the dns information per domain not the registrar then create a database just for dns and the sites that resolves to each dns.
From there it would be easy to run a pattern analysis for each domain that is being hosted in that dns.
If multiple domains shows near similar pattern(structure, theme, ODP listing ;), page rank, and other factors) then it's possible to penalize some of near duplicate domains without even bothering checking for IP.
However, in cases like...
1. Templated affiliate programs where the only distinction between the two site is the domain name, IMHO, Google have the right to index only one of the domain regardless if the two sites are owned by separate owner. Why would it index 2 same site?
2. Realtors - where a big hosting & design company use the same template and database. I'm not sure how Google would treat this one. Perhaps 1 site per county per major realtor depending on other algo factors for each realtor.
I agree that will not be a detrimental effect by on its own.
It's near impossible that two separate webmaster with the same market would have a 'near' similar structure.
The question is not the structure is DNS
What will Google be looking next?
I am bit confused about this any ideas?
The question is not the structure is DNS
Right on Birdy. Conventional wisdom also assumes Whois information is completely corrupted and useless because people fake the records. Ergo, Google can't possibly use a Whois database. That's not as safe an assumption as generally believed. A publicly available subscription service allows access to the history of changes to a domains Whois record. It's likely Google has those records in their DB also.