Forum Moderators: open
Hosted by Westhost.com
rmjvol
edited for clarity
Do to restrictions at the old web host, I can't use UNIX commands to automatically forward the pages to the new domain. I'm hoping the 50 one way HTML links are okay with Google.
I'll know either way in about a month when the next Google index comes out.
Do to restrictions at the old web host, I can't use UNIX commands to automatically forward the pages to the new domain.
wow, that sux. I'd be interested in knowing how it goes.
Good luck,
rmjvol
Do you have access to PHP or some other programming language?
It's a site I put up as a hobby site several years ago under my dial-up account, no frills, freebie web space. Back then I didn't foresee it having the amount of traffic it does now or making money from affiliate links. So my technical options for forwarding the pages at this point are pretty limited.
I don't think I'm doing anything the least bit shady by having the forwarding pages with links to the new pages, so I'm hoping Google will see it that way, too.
Jane_Doe: me too. please do post your results. thanks all.
Okay, here are my results about linking multiple pages from one site to the next, at least so far in the dance.....
My old site with the ~60 forwarding pages to the new site has about 400 inbound links still (~50 that show up in Google). Each forwarding page on the old site has a link to the page where the content was moved to under the new domain. (I was worried about this part).
The new domain has about 30 links from other sites that switched their links in time for this update, plus the ~60 links from the forwarding pages of the old site.
So far everything looks really good. In some cases the forwarding pages at the old domain are still showing in the SERPS, if the old page still had a lot of links pointing to it. The new pages are also showing up and are ranking only slightly lower than they did under the old domain name, which is great since the new site only has a fraction of the inbound links as the old site.
At this rate (knock on wood) it's looks like the site under the new domain should have much of it's old rankings back within the next few months.
So I was prepared for the worst - I didn't know what Google what make of the 60 or so forwarding pages. But, at least so far, it turned out pretty good. I'm assuming the linking from one domain to the next was okay since both domains had a lot of external links from other sites. Plus the sites weren't cross linked. Except for two new to old links made in error, the pages on the new site do not link back to the old pages.
With all respect tyroids. This question seems really silly. And i say "seems" because I dont mean to be rude. And it is asked more frequently these days on these boards.
Reciprocal linking is almost always a SEO tactic to increase page rank, only started when search engines stopped using on page text factors as their main ranking criterion and started to use link popularity criteria such as page rank.
The purest (and one may say virginal) form of link is a one way link, where the webmaster links to a site only because they think it will be of use to their readers.
In the "good old days" :) 95% of links were one way. OK some people linked to did link back, but again it was only because they thought the other site was good for their readers too!
I would hazard a guess that today the substantive number of links on the web are of the "your scratch my back, iid scratch yours variety". It only adds to useless bandwidth and clutter.
If anything, google may one day penalise or more likely decrease the value of reciprocal links, and personally I think it would be a great thing for the quality of their index.
Your question only reflects I think, the fact that linking is now used more as a SEO tactic, rather than for the improvement of a site for visitors. It is anaologous to all those carefully constructed "word density" pages that waste so much of browsers time in the old days and still today with old content borne of the glorious days of text density spam!
I still refuse to link to anyone unless the link will lead my readers to more information on my topic. But then I am still living in the "good old days" of writing my own sloppy HTML. :)
Anne
Imagine 3 Bio. pages - don't know the exact number but may be 1% are seo'd pages. Penalizing for one way linking would not only affect the 1%! All 'normal' sites would also get slapped. The people that don't know about the existance of PR just link the old way - they just want to provide their users with useful stuff. One way linking is older than the <b>tag. It can't get penalized ... if you don't cheat and/or link to a bad neighborhood..
Not really. I have a total of two sites related to one topic, one with a grand total of, count'em, 2 pages. (I'd insert a smiley face here but believe it or not I haven't figured out how.) The smaller site happens to have an intuitive URL and I simply wanted to be cautious about linking as the entire matter of (one-way in this case) seems to be particularly fraught.
If anything, my question reflects an SEO-"upstairs/downstairs" knowledge-gap that exists between the info have's and have-not's (i.e., moi). Professional (upstairs) SEO's often do not consider that from a newcomer's (that's what "tyro" means) perspective the entire world of optimization can appear one big mine-field. As in this case, the result can be to mislabel a straight-forward question born from fear of harsh penalties we don't well understand with "a SEO tactic." We are talking about 1 or 2 one-way links here. Would that I were sophisticated enough to employ SEO tactics.
I write not only because I'm dumb and defensive (smiley-face), but because I believe strongly there are lots of 'lurkers' out there, perhaps a silent majority, with questions they are reluctant to post for fear of having them labeled 'silly.'
<script>
<!--
document.replace("http://www.webmasterworld.com/x.html");
//-->
</script>
replacing the address with the one you want to forward to. Anyone with JavaScript enabled, will be forwarded without disabling the back button. Everyone else will see the rest of the page, where you should put the page moved message and links.
apologies again.
Keep in mind 50 links from one site are not nearly as good as 50 links from 50 sites, so you will still need to contact the people that are linking to your old site and give them the new address. If everything goes well, you will be in great shape in about 3 months.
Hi Jane_Doe,
Correct the PR will not be transferred.
mayor - "if you're talking about making a gateway domain... be very very careful."
thanks for the caveat. i'm not sure what a 'gateway doamin' is but the sites in question are independent and have different copy so i hope that's ok.
jane_doe: thanks for the updated info
all: happy New Year
Mayor wrote:
"tyrojds, if you're talking about making a gateway domain by linking MULTIPLE pages to another site be careful ... be very very careful. This would be a high-risk site in Google and other engines."
Mayor,
care to elaborate?
I can understand the need for caution, however, many sites have a footer with links to all their partners on all pages, and they rank well.
Any more info about this?
By using an external domain for the doorway pages you distance the principal domain from the wrath of the search engines if the doorway pages are discovered.
Search engines hate them and will probably ban the site if they find them. Competitors know how much the search engines hate them and will probably snitch on you real quick if they see them. SE algorithms may now be refined enough to find them also.
Do a search here at WebmasterWorld for 'gateway domains' if you want more info.
I got real smart with two sites and turned them into cross linked gateway domains for one another. They did great for a little while, then got banned from three major search engines. :( Maybe the ban had nothing to do with gateways and crosslinking, but I decided to cease and desist from this practice.
i didn't think my site in question qualified as a gateway site. it has only two pages, a few informational links, and isn't optimized. it did/does have a one-way link to my main site on both pages. the links identify the destination as 'sponsor.' but after this update i just noticed it's bar had gone from blank/white to grey. if this signifies a ban i'm really confused. make that paranoid. the whole thing still seems really innocuous to me.
Could we get penalized at all from getting a link from them (even if we do not link back)? I have read on WW that if you do not link back, you should be fine. But I am just very cautious because we currently rank well on google and cannot take any chances because that is how we make our living (I would rather not put all of our eggs in one basket, but that seems to be what is required - until Yahoo! changes their SERP's - and yes we do get some traffic from some of the smaller players, but not enough to live on).
It sounds like a risk/benefit analysis and the way you describe it there doesn't sound like there's sufficient upside. Then again, when a one-page site linking to another small site gets greybarred, who knows what the rules are?
